BC coach fired for interviewing with Jets (1 Viewer)

[Sweetness_34]

Colin Cowherd was talking about this today morning. He basically said that it is high time the colleges did this because the NFL has tampering rules for their coaches and they do not allow their coaches or players to talk to any other teams when under contract, so why should the colleges also not protect their assets, especially in this economy.

I actually agree with BC here. High time someone grew a pair in the College world....

 

[bosoxs45]

BC was looking for stability

I can't agree with this. If they wanted stability, they would not have basically pushed out O'Brien, who had built an extremely successful and stable program, both on and off the field, at BC. IIRC DiFilippo was a big factor in that situation, as was O'Brien's salary, which was 10th highest in the ACC despite the success of the program.

Coaches typically don't stay forever. After 10 years it was time for O'Brien to leave, from both his and BC's standpoint. Trust me when I say the vast majority of BC fans were not sad to see him go. He had a bunch of solid years but BC was never going to take another step forward with O'Brien as HC, and more importantly Dana Bible as OC. There is no way BC plays in the ACC Champ games the past two years with O'Brien and his staff still in place. BC lost at least on "what the ####?" game a year due to O'Brien's ultra conservative, "play not to lose" in-game coacing style. Jags and Logan were a breath of fresh air, the anti-Obrien/Bible. When I say BC wanted stability I mean they were looking for a guy who, like O'Brien, wasn't just using BC as a stopping point before taking another step up. O'Brien and BC parting ways after a decade in no way suggest BC wasn't looking for stability with his replacement.

 

[Mr Capicollo]

Colin Cowherd was talking about this today morning. He basically said that it is high time the colleges did this because the NFL has tampering rules for their coaches and they do not allow their coaches or players to talk to any other teams when under contract, so why should the colleges also not protect their assets, especially in this economy.

I actually agree with BC here. High time someone grew a pair in the College world....

NFL tampering rules don't apply to coaches speaking with colleges about coaching positions. They only apply to other NFL teams. What I've always wondered (thinking like the lawyer I am) is why colleges or pro teams don't file lawsuits for Intentional Interference with a Contractual Relationship, a perfectly viable tort theory.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Colin Cowherd was talking about this today morning. He basically said that it is high time the colleges did this because the NFL has tampering rules for their coaches and they do not allow their coaches or players to talk to any other teams when under contract, so why should the colleges also not protect their assets, especially in this economy.

I actually agree with BC here. High time someone grew a pair in the College world....

NFL tampering rules don't apply to coaches speaking with colleges about coaching positions. They only apply to other NFL teams. What I've always wondered (thinking like the lawyer I am) is why colleges or pro teams don't file lawsuits for Intentional Interference with a Contractual Relationship, a perfectly viable tort theory.

What are the damages?It would also depend on what the contract said -- I'm sure some have out clauses for the coaches in certain circumstances.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

A lot of talk about loyalty in here, but fact is, if Jags had piled up two one seasons in a row, his butt would be on the street and no one question it.

I don't fault BC here. But I also don't fault a college coach looking to get a head job in the NFL. Those opportunties don't just show up every day.

 

[Serenity Now]

While it seems very likely that Jag will go on the interview (which is tonight or tomorrow)...it hasn't actually happened yet and he's not actually been fired yet.

 

[JamesTheScot]

Idiotic decision by BC. What coach will want to coach there now? I mean the guy was just interviewing for the job. The only scenario I could possibly see was that Jagodzinksi promised BC that he would be there longterm.

I have no doubt this is the case. BC went way out on a limb to give this guy his first HC job, and they paid him more than they've paid any other coachin their history. In return Jags promised DiFilippo he'd stick around for at least three years and now he's reneged on that promise.

Is interviewing all it takes to "renege on that promise", or would it take actually accepting a job? Some people interview to gain experience or networking exposure with longer term interests in mind. It's not like Jagodzinksi was any sort of front-runner for the Jets job, right?This seems like an overreaction by BC here.

I don't think the bolded part is true. You might interview for a job you don't think you'll get and you might interview for a job that won't result in dissapointment if you don't get it. You might even interview for a job that you aren't sure you want...because the interview will probably tell you what you need to know to make that decision. In each of those situations, you'll consider the experience or networking contacts a nice consolation prize and so you go through with it. But you rarely interview for a job you know ahead of time you will not accept if offered. Do you really think this is what's going on here? I mean, if he does go through with the interview, that kinda shoots that theory in the foot doesn't it? If he goes through with it, he isn't doing it for experience...he's wanting out of BC and into the NFL.

We'll never be able to crawl inside peoples' heads and know for sure their motives, and everyones' motives are going to vary for each interview/job opportunity that presents itseflf, so it's silly to have such a pat stance on why people do or do not interview. I stand by what I said.

I can respect that and to some extent agree as far as what we can truly "know" about someone. But when guessing at what someone's thinking, especially in regards to leaving/taking a job, I'll go with plain old-fahsioned self-interest every time. You don't risk losing one lucrative job by interviewing for another more lucrative job unless you are willing to accept the more lucrative job. You sure as hell don't interview for it over the objections and threats of your present boss just so you can gain some interview experience or fatten your business card collection when you have zero interest in the position.On a seperate note, I'm often surprised how angry people get when an employee gets replaced by someone who does the job cheaper yet they don't get angry when the employee quits for something that pays better.

Would the coach feel like he was being treated fairly if BC periodically interviewed potential coaching candidates while he was still under contract and peforming well? Nothing wrong with the college trying to find a cheaper replacement, is there? I mean, they aren't going to fire him unless they offer the job to the candidate and he accepts, right?

By many accounts Mangini was a fool, yet the Jets waited until they fired him before they started interviewing replacements. Aren't we pushing a little bit of a double standard here?

 

[Mr Capicollo]

Idiotic decision by BC. What coach will want to coach there now? I mean the guy was just interviewing for the job. The only scenario I could possibly see was that Jagodzinksi promised BC that he would be there longterm.

I have no doubt this is the case. BC went way out on a limb to give this guy his first HC job, and they paid him more than they've paid any other coachin their history. In return Jags promised DiFilippo he'd stick around for at least three years and now he's reneged on that promise.

Is interviewing all it takes to "renege on that promise", or would it take actually accepting a job? Some people interview to gain experience or networking exposure with longer term interests in mind. It's not like Jagodzinksi was any sort of front-runner for the Jets job, right?This seems like an overreaction by BC here.

I don't think the bolded part is true. You might interview for a job you don't think you'll get and you might interview for a job that won't result in dissapointment if you don't get it. You might even interview for a job that you aren't sure you want...because the interview will probably tell you what you need to know to make that decision. In each of those situations, you'll consider the experience or networking contacts a nice consolation prize and so you go through with it. But you rarely interview for a job you know ahead of time you will not accept if offered. Do you really think this is what's going on here? I mean, if he does go through with the interview, that kinda shoots that theory in the foot doesn't it? If he goes through with it, he isn't doing it for experience...he's wanting out of BC and into the NFL.

We'll never be able to crawl inside peoples' heads and know for sure their motives, and everyones' motives are going to vary for each interview/job opportunity that presents itseflf, so it's silly to have such a pat stance on why people do or do not interview. I stand by what I said.

I can respect that and to some extent agree as far as what we can truly "know" about someone. But when guessing at what someone's thinking, especially in regards to leaving/taking a job, I'll go with plain old-fahsioned self-interest every time. You don't risk losing one lucrative job by interviewing for another more lucrative job unless you are willing to accept the more lucrative job. You sure as hell don't interview for it over the objections and threats of your present boss just so you can gain some interview experience or fatten your business card collection when you have zero interest in the position.On a seperate note, I'm often surprised how angry people get when an employee gets replaced by someone who does the job cheaper yet they don't get angry when the employee quits for something that pays better.

Would the coach feel like he was being treated fairly if BC periodically interviewed potential coaching candidates while he was still under contract and peforming well? Nothing wrong with the college trying to find a cheaper replacement, is there? I mean, they aren't going to fire him unless they offer the job to the candidate and he accepts, right?

By many accounts Mangini was a fool, yet the Jets waited until they fired him before they started interviewing replacements. Aren't we pushing a little bit of a double standard here?

Fair enough. And just to show you that I'm not all caught up with the "just interviewing for experience" angle I've been taking, if coach Jags agreed not to interview with anyone else before his three years were up, and then turned around and did just that, then he deserves to get fired.

 

[bosoxs45]

Jags interviewed and got caught. He totally can get fired now, but he didn't do anything that 99% of people looking for a new job while employed would not do themselves.

So I still don't think the guy is greasy. I think he's been a great coach here and achieved a lot. I could puke over the way the school and program will come out of this. It stinks.

 

[GregR_2]

It's not good for a program when their Head Coach, who's under contract, starts flirting with other teams. Good for Boston College.

Just so I'm clear... it's bad when the NFL interviews a BC coach after BC's season is over.... but it was ok when BC interviewed and hired Jeff Jagodzinski away from the Packers coaching staff while the Packers were still mid-season?

 

[Chadstroma]

That is an odd way of keeping your coach (which is what they were afraid of?) and a great way of discouraging top talent to come coach for them. Who wants to work for a school that will fire you if you dare explore another possibility in the pro's?

 

[Why Me?]

Looks like he lied to Gene D when asked about contact w/ the Jets. If all of this is true, good for Gene for having a spine. Ballsy move given Jags' popularity w/ BC fans but I think he will be roundly applauded. link

Everything was on hold in the Boston College athletic offices this afternoon as officials waited for confirmation that football coach Jeff Jagodzinski was actually interviewing with the New York Jets -- something which Eagles officials told him would lead to his termination.

While there was no confirmation of any meeting taking place, BC officials made it clear that Jagodzinski's tenure could indeed be coming to an end, even if he doesn't talk to the Jets tonight.

"I think Jeff Jagodzinski did a great job here,'' said BC athletic director Gene DeFilippo late this afternoon. "But I want a person who wants to be at Boston College and who wants to stay here a long, long time. I thought I had that person.''

Despite the warnings, Jagodzinski was expected to meet with Jets officials later tonight or early tomorrow about filling the vacancy created when coach Eric Mangini was fired last week.

Although there had been various reports stating that a clause in Jagodzinski's contract prohibited any contact with NFL teams for his first three seasons -- the coach is in the second year of a five-year deal with a total compensation package of more than $1 million per season -- sources at BC said yesterday that no such clause existed, although there was an understanding that Jagodzinski, who was hired two years ago to replace Tom O'Brien, would refrain from seeking other jobs for at least three seasons.

The crux of the issue was not the contract, but the failure by Jagodzinski to tell DeFilippo about the contact with the Jets. DeFilippo learned of the situation between the Jets and Jagodzinski Saturday afternoon when a reporter asked him if any contact between the coach and team had been made. DeFilippo, who had asked Jagodzinski earlier about the matter and been told that published reports of an imminent meeting were false, was then informed that a meeting had been set up and that Jagodzinski had not told him the truth.

Said one athletic director familiar with the situation who has dealt with contact between professional teams and his coaches, "Making contact with the NFL is not a big deal,'' said the athletic director. "If you are good, it happens all the time. We deal with it, just as long as I know about it, it's not a problem.''

When told that Jagodzinski had not told DeFilippo about meeting with the Jets, the athletic director paused. "That's different,'' he said. "I would have a big problem with that.''

DeFilippo was waiting to confirm that Jagodzinski had actually met with the Jets. As of late this afternoon, he had not talked to the coach since Sunday, when DeFilippo expressed his disappointment and anger at not being told the truth and told Jagodzinski that if he proceed with the meeting his job would be at risk.

Even if Jagodzinski canceled the meeting and wanted to return to BC, DeFilippo feels that the issue of trust had been breached, which would make it difficult for the coach to return for a third season.

Although Jagodzinski's total compensation package was substantial, the termination would be based on a much smaller base-salary, making it easier for the school to dismiss him.

If BC does fire Jagodzinski, the school is expected to fill the position quickly with an internal hire.

Although there had been early speculation that BC offensive coordinator Steve Logan was a frontrunner, defensive coordinator Frank Spaziani has emerged as an even stronger candidate.

Spaziani, who has been at BC for 12 years, was a finalist for the job two years ago when O'Brien left to take the head coaching job at North Carolina State. Spaziani provides the stability that DeFilippo wants for the program and would have almost no inclination to leave for another job.

 

[Rockchild]

I don't see what business it is of the employer if someone interviews for another job even if there is a contract(unless there is specific language in the contract forbidding someone from interviewing for another job). They may not like the fact that someone is looking for another job but until another job is accepted and resignation given they really have no real recourse IMO. I guess they can fire him for interviewing but I'm sure his contract would be honoured as if he was fired for a losing season(again,unless there was specific language in the contract for such a scenario).

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I don't see what business it is of the employer if someone interviews for another job even if there is a contract(unless there is specific language in the contract forbidding someone from interviewing for another job). They may not like the fact that someone is looking for another job but until another job is accepted and resignation given they really have no real recourse IMO. I guess they can fire him for interviewing but I'm sure his contract would be honoured as if he was fired for a losing season(again,unless there was specific language in the contract for such a scenario).

Power trip by the AD?

 

[Why Me?]

I don't see what business it is of the employer if someone interviews for another job even if there is a contract(unless there is specific language in the contract forbidding someone from interviewing for another job). They may not like the fact that someone is looking for another job but until another job is accepted and resignation given they really have no real recourse IMO. I guess they can fire him for interviewing but I'm sure his contract would be honoured as if he was fired for a losing season(again,unless there was specific language in the contract for such a scenario).

Power trip by the AD?

If the account I posted above is true, you maintain that stance?

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I don't see what business it is of the employer if someone interviews for another job even if there is a contract(unless there is specific language in the contract forbidding someone from interviewing for another job). They may not like the fact that someone is looking for another job but until another job is accepted and resignation given they really have no real recourse IMO. I guess they can fire him for interviewing but I'm sure his contract would be honoured as if he was fired for a losing season(again,unless there was specific language in the contract for such a scenario).

Power trip by the AD?

If the account I posted above is true, you maintain that stance?

If he is only pissed off that he did not know, I think that's somewhat of a power trip. I'll never know who said what and the real truth in all this but I do know that DeFillipo does not look good, IMO. He should have never threatened him. He should have reminded him of the contract when he found out about the interview and left it at that. If he wanted to fire him after the interview, do it and get it over with. I'm lost over why everyone is so upset that Jags wants to interview for the Jets job. It is a step up not only in pay but also prestige than the BC job. Most of us would interview in that situation. And it doesn't necessarily mean Jags wants out of BC, isn't committed to them, or anything else. Getting an NFL head coach interview is probably rare and he should do it when given the opportunity.

 

[Kiddnets]

Let me get this straight -

The guy has no clause in his contract that prevents him from interviewing - he interviews for a better job with more prestige and pay - doesn't want his boss to find out so he keeps it on the down low.....

and some of you guys think he did something wrong?

Anyone who has moved up the corporate ladder has done with this guy did - tread lightly before throwing stones at him!

 

[Mr Capicollo]

Let me get this straight - The guy has no clause in his contract that prevents him from interviewing - he interviews for a better job with more prestige and pay - doesn't want his boss to find out so he keeps it on the down low.....and some of you guys think he did something wrong? Anyone who has moved up the corporate ladder has done with this guy did - tread lightly before throwing stones at him!

The moral of the story is don't lie to your boss. Pretty simple really. I don't have a problem with the AD deciding to can him.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Never saw this before - guess the guy really want to be a Jet - has to be more to the story....

Dan Patrick, who might or might not be transmogrifying into a college football reporter,

Thanks for reminding me...ARMAGEDDON WEEK is JANUARY 4 - 11 on the History Channel, I have been forgetting to watch.(The theory being when transmogrify shows up in the lead of a sports report, you know the end is near.)

 

[Rockchild]

I don't see what business it is of the employer if someone interviews for another job even if there is a contract(unless there is specific language in the contract forbidding someone from interviewing for another job). They may not like the fact that someone is looking for another job but until another job is accepted and resignation given they really have no real recourse IMO. I guess they can fire him for interviewing but I'm sure his contract would be honoured as if he was fired for a losing season(again,unless there was specific language in the contract for such a scenario).

Power trip by the AD?

If the account I posted above is true, you maintain that stance?

The fact that he denied, when asked directly, that he was meeting with the Jets does somewhat change my stance. I can see the AD being upset for being lied to.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

So what's BC's next move? Are they going to drop the scholarship of a player who asks the NFL draft board what their grade would be and then decides to come back to school?

 

[trader jake]

Why is someone disloyal because they change jobs?

That's not why Jags is disloyal.He's disloyal because he lies his ### off to get what he wants. He undermines authority above him whether it's a head coach or an AD.Buyer beware on Jags...what comes around, goes around.

 

[Why Me?]

So what's BC's next move? Are they going to drop the scholarship of a player who asks the NFL draft board what their grade would be and then decides to come back to school?

Great analogy!

 

[stlrams]

So let me get this straight, BC fires it coach after he lied and want him to honor his contract yet BC officials lied to the Big East and bought out its contract to leave early for the ACC. Wow BC really does have an image problem in thinking they're better then everyone else.

 

[Why Me?]

So let me get this straight, BC fires it coach after he lied and want him to honor his contract yet BC officials lied to the Big East and bought out its contract to leave early for the ACC. Wow BC really does have an image problem in thinking they're better then everyone else.

Link to BC lying about moving to ACC? Rutgers or UConn grad?

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

So let me get this straight, BC fires it coach after he lied and want him to honor his contract yet BC officials lied to the Big East and bought out its contract to leave early for the ACC. Wow BC really does have an image problem in thinking they're better then everyone else.

Link to BC lying about moving to ACC? Rutgers or UConn grad?

WVU is an option too.

 

[stlrams]

So let me get this straight, BC fires it coach after he lied and want him to honor his contract yet BC officials lied to the Big East and bought out its contract to leave early for the ACC. Wow BC really does have an image problem in thinking they're better then everyone else.

Link to BC lying about moving to ACC? Rutgers or UConn grad?

BC came out publicly that they were not moving to ACC then a short time later they left after the ACC couldn't get Syracuse to move. This was in the papers and the reason why lawsuits ensue after the annoucement. Does the fact that I'm a UConn grad doesn't mitigate or lessen what BC did?? Everything I saying is true and public information.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

So let me get this straight, BC fires it coach after he lied and want him to honor his contract yet BC officials lied to the Big East and bought out its contract to leave early for the ACC. Wow BC really does have an image problem in thinking they're better then everyone else.

Link to BC lying about moving to ACC? Rutgers or UConn grad?

BC came out publicly that they were not moving to ACC then a short time later they left after the ACC couldn't get Syracuse to move. This was in the papers and the reason why lawsuits ensue after the annoucement. Does the fact that I'm a UConn grad doesn't mitigate or lessen what BC did?? Everything I saying is true and public information.

LOL. The ACC could not get Syracuse to move? That's a good one. Syracuse was coming with BC and Miami until Mark Warner forced UVA to block expansion unless Va Tech was included. Warner got his way because Duke and UNC would not budge on the vote for anyone.

 

[Why Me?]

So let me get this straight, BC fires it coach after he lied and want him to honor his contract yet BC officials lied to the Big East and bought out its contract to leave early for the ACC. Wow BC really does have an image problem in thinking they're better then everyone else.

Link to BC lying about moving to ACC? Rutgers or UConn grad?

BC came out publicly that they were not moving to ACC then a short time later they left after the ACC couldn't get Syracuse to move. This was in the papers and the reason why lawsuits ensue after the annoucement. Does the fact that I'm a UConn grad doesn't mitigate or lessen what BC did?? Everything I saying is true and public information.

LOL. The ACC could not get Syracuse to move? That's a good one. Syracuse was coming with BC and Miami until Mark Warner forced UVA to block expansion unless Va Tech was included. Warner got his way because Duke and UNC would not budge on the vote for anyone.

Original vote for Cuse, BC and Miami was rejected. Second vote approved Maimi and VA Tech. A few months later there was another vote when it was decided 11 teams made much more sense than 12. At that time they invited BC, and BC accepted - just as UConn, WVA, Syracuse or any other BE school with big time football aspirations would have done. BC was the best fit atheltically and academically though. Sorry the move hurt your feelings. Yes, between in the time between being rejected at the first vote and then being accepted a year later BC resigned itself to staying in the BE, and participated in league meetings and whatnot. What were they supposed to do? They never concealed their wishes to join the ACC though.

 

[stlrams]

So let me get this straight, BC fires it coach after he lied and want him to honor his contract yet BC officials lied to the Big East and bought out its contract to leave early for the ACC. Wow BC really does have an image problem in thinking they're better then everyone else.

Link to BC lying about moving to ACC? Rutgers or UConn grad?

BC came out publicly that they were not moving to ACC then a short time later they left after the ACC couldn't get Syracuse to move. This was in the papers and the reason why lawsuits ensue after the annoucement. Does the fact that I'm a UConn grad doesn't mitigate or lessen what BC did?? Everything I saying is true and public information.

LOL. The ACC could not get Syracuse to move? That's a good one. Syracuse was coming with BC and Miami until Mark Warner forced UVA to block expansion unless Va Tech was included. Warner got his way because Duke and UNC would not budge on the vote for anyone.

Original vote for Cuse, BC and Miami was rejected. Second vote approved Maimi and VA Tech. A few months later there was another vote when it was decided 11 teams made much more sense than 12. At that time they invited BC, and BC accepted - just as UConn, WVA, Syracuse or any other BE school with big time football aspirations would have done. BC was the best fit atheltically and academically though. Sorry the move hurt your feelings. Yes, between in the time between being rejected at the first vote and then being accepted a year later BC resigned itself to staying in the BE, and participated in league meetings and whatnot. What were they supposed to do? They never concealed their wishes to join the ACC though.

The above events are correct as my memory is foggy. However the in between time you mentioned above I know the BC's Predsi dent and AD made several verbal committments to the BE publicly. To me its two face when you make a commitment then reneg a short time later especially when the President is a Catholic Priest..............

 

[PewterFan]

It's not good for a program when their Head Coach, who's under contract, starts flirting with other teams. Good for Boston College.

Just so I'm clear... it's bad when the NFL interviews a BC coach after BC's season is over.... but it was ok when BC interviewed and hired Jeff Jagodzinski away from the Packers coaching staff while the Packers were still mid-season?

Both are bad.

 

[Ruffrodys05]

Curious......has Jags actually been fired yet?

 

[Why Me?]

Curious......has Jags actually been fired yet?

not officially

 

[AB in DC]

Nope.

Mods: Please change the topic heading.

 

[JamesTheScot]

So what's BC's next move? Are they going to drop the scholarship of a player who asks the NFL draft board what their grade would be and then decides to come back to school?

They aren't under multi-year contracts, are they?It kills me. Most people believe you should abide by and live up to a contract. That is...until it involves professional sports. Then contracts don't mean ****, apparently.

Jags was under contract to coach for BC for three(?) more years. When he goes interviewing for a position that will necessarily require him to BREACH HIS CONTRACT, of course it becomes BC's business.

We can argue about whether they should have let him interview for it with no repurcusions...but he apparently didn't even give them that option. He told them he was sticking around for a long time (allegedly, I concede) and then lied about having set up an interview.

Still no response by anyone to the double standard question. Would BC be doing Jags wrong if they secretly interviewed other coaching candidates without firing Jags first just to see if they might find someone they like a little better?

 

[bosoxs45]

Curious......has Jags actually been fired yet?

nope.

 

[Rockchild]

So what's BC's next move? Are they going to drop the scholarship of a player who asks the NFL draft board what their grade would be and then decides to come back to school?

They aren't under multi-year contracts, are they?It kills me. Most people believe you should abide by and live up to a contract. That is...until it involves professional sports. Then contracts don't mean ****, apparently.

Jags was under contract to coach for BC for three(?) more years. When he goes interviewing for a position that will necessarily require him to BREACH HIS CONTRACT, of course it becomes BC's business.

We can argue about whether they should have let him interview for it with no repurcusions...but he apparently didn't even give them that option. He told them he was sticking around for a long time (allegedly, I concede) and then lied about having set up an interview.

Still no response by anyone to the double standard question. Would BC be doing Jags wrong if they secretly interviewed other coaching candidates without firing Jags first just to see if they might find someone they like a little better?

There usually is language in contracts to account for any breach which in most cases is cost prohibitive for the average person(non-professional athlete) to absorb. Professional sports,in particular football, is a unique entity in this regard.

 

[Riffraff]

They should have seen the signs...

BC interviewer: If you could have any job in the world, what would it be?

Jags: Head coach at BC. It's a dream come true. It's the only job for me!

BC interviewer: Where do you see yourself in 5 years?

Jags: Head coach of the New York J - E - T - S.

 

[azcards33]

Idiotic decision by BC. What coach will want to coach there now? I mean the guy was just interviewing for the job. The only scenario I could possibly see was that Jagodzinksi promised BC that he would be there longterm.

I have no doubt this is the case. BC went way out on a limb to give this guy his first HC job, and they paid him more than they've paid any other coachin their history. In return Jags promised DiFilippo he'd stick around for at least three years and now he's reneged on that promise.

at the same time, do you think that if this guys went 2-10 this year and 3-9 next season that BC would remain loyal to him?

doubtful at best

 

[Why Me?]

Idiotic decision by BC. What coach will want to coach there now? I mean the guy was just interviewing for the job. The only scenario I could possibly see was that Jagodzinksi promised BC that he would be there longterm.

I have no doubt this is the case. BC went way out on a limb to give this guy his first HC job, and they paid him more than they've paid any other coachin their history. In return Jags promised DiFilippo he'd stick around for at least three years and now he's reneged on that promise.

at the same time, do you think that if this guys went 2-10 this year and 3-9 next season that BC would remain loyal to him?

doubtful at best

They'd have to pay him. It's a guaranteed contract. Big difference.

 

[Why Me?]

Good article by Dan Shaugnessy, who I rarely agree with:

Wrong turn down a one-way streetBy Dan Shaughnessy, Globe Columnist | January 7, 2009Precisely when did a contract become a one-way deal?You see it all the time in sports. Free agent Manny Ramírez signs a contract with the Red Sox in 2000 and it looks great. But when it comes to 2008 and he doesn't like those two one-year club options at the tail end of his deal, Manny lies down like a dog to get out of the contract and make the options disappear. The team is forced to trade him.After the 2007 World Series, Curt Schilling signs a one-year deal for $8 million plus incentives. When he shows up in spring training looking like Chris Farley, unable to throw a Wiffleball because of an injury, the club is on the hook to pay him the $8 million. For no services. The club must live up to the contract.Which brings us to Jeff Jagodzinski, the NFL-smitten, AWOL Boston College football coach who appears certain to be fired when he finally meets face to face with athletic director Gene DeFilippo.Jags was brought in by DeFilippo just two years ago. He'd never been a head coach anywhere. Not even in high school. Yet DeFilippo gave him a five- year deal. Silly Gene thought five years meant five years. He never envisioned Jagodzinski running to New York to interview with the Jets after just two years of service to Boston College.That's because so many coaches and ballplayers see contracts as security without obligation.No. It's supposed to be both. When you sign a guaranteed contract, you forfeit some independence and chances to better your position for the duration of the deal. You take security over potential opportunity. If you don't produce, the company still pays you. In exchange, the company knows you are bound to work for it until the deal expires. Pretty simple, right?Not if you're coach of a big-time college program. In that case, you tell your AD and all of your recruits that you are going to be there. You lie. And then you bail when there's a chance of a better gig. You make a date for the prom, then stand up your date after the corsage has been purchased - just because somebody better-looking offered to go with you.Jagodzinski is a long shot to get the Jets' head coaching job. If the Jets hire someone else, he might be able to go to the Seattle Seahawks as offensive coordinator. Like a lot of guys, he has the pro game in his blood. Plus, he's only 45 years old and he has five kids and this could be a good thing for his family.But what about the dozens of athletes he looked in the eye? What about all the players who came to BC believing that Jags was going to be around for at least another three years? What about some loyalty to DeFilippo, who made him a head coach when no one else would take a chance on him? What about at least asking your boss if you can interview elsewhere when you are only 40 percent done with your contract?We all know that this is a pro sports town. BC football was ranked second in the country in November 2007, and the Eagles still played in relative obscurity. We care about the Red Sox, Patriots, Celtics, and Bruins. How many New Englanders are even aware that the NCAA football championship game is tomorrow night? If you lived in Oklahoma, Florida, Texas, or Georgia, you'd know. Not here.But a deal is a deal. DeFilippo is right on this one. The AD first heard about Jags talking with the Jets from a sportswriter Saturday morning (bad form, Coach). He finally got a call from Jags later that day. When he met with Jagodzinski Sunday, he told him if he interviewed with the Jets, he would be fired. Jagodzinski went anyway. Along the way, he stopped returning calls from his boss.DeFilippo was still in the dark yesterday afternoon."I talked to him on Sunday and I have left him several messages today," said the AD. "He could be interviewing all day. I don't know where we're at."When somebody looks you in the eye and shakes your hand and tells you something, that to me is as important as a contract. When somebody gives you a break and then after two years, the first chance you have to go interview, then you're going to take off, that is a little bit . . . it hurts, especially when you really like this guy, and I like him."You think he's a really good guy and a good coach and now here we are. I certainly would not have hired a coach if I thought he was going to leave in two years. The understanding was I wanted a coach who was going to be here for a long time, and I thought I had one."DeFilippo said he still hadn't talked with Jagodzinski at the close of business hours yesterday. Apparently, DeFilippo wants to fire Jagodzinski in person, perhaps today. Hopefully, it won't be one of those Rick Pitino situations where the coach never returns to Boston. In any event, it's over. Time for Jags to pack the bags.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Idiotic decision by BC. What coach will want to coach there now? I mean the guy was just interviewing for the job. The only scenario I could possibly see was that Jagodzinksi promised BC that he would be there longterm.

I have no doubt this is the case. BC went way out on a limb to give this guy his first HC job, and they paid him more than they've paid any other coachin their history. In return Jags promised DiFilippo he'd stick around for at least three years and now he's reneged on that promise.

at the same time, do you think that if this guys went 2-10 this year and 3-9 next season that BC would remain loyal to him?

doubtful at best

They'd have to pay him. It's a guaranteed contract. Big difference.

They'd still be taking away his right to coach the team, which is breaking the contract. Neither side has "loyalty" when it comes to coaches contracts. Both franchise/school and coach are looking out for themselves. As they should be doing.

 

[Obie Wan]

Idiotic decision by BC. What coach will want to coach there now? I mean the guy was just interviewing for the job. The only scenario I could possibly see was that Jagodzinksi promised BC that he would be there longterm.

I have no doubt this is the case. BC went way out on a limb to give this guy his first HC job, and they paid him more than they've paid any other coachin their history. In return Jags promised DiFilippo he'd stick around for at least three years and now he's reneged on that promise.

guess if they felt so strongly about it, BC should have put that provision in the contract with clear penalties.instead they are relying on a verbal promise that he would stay 3 years out of a 5 year contract.

 

[Why Me?]

Idiotic decision by BC. What coach will want to coach there now? I mean the guy was just interviewing for the job. The only scenario I could possibly see was that Jagodzinksi promised BC that he would be there longterm.

I have no doubt this is the case. BC went way out on a limb to give this guy his first HC job, and they paid him more than they've paid any other coachin their history. In return Jags promised DiFilippo he'd stick around for at least three years and now he's reneged on that promise.

at the same time, do you think that if this guys went 2-10 this year and 3-9 next season that BC would remain loyal to him?

doubtful at best

They'd have to pay him. It's a guaranteed contract. Big difference.

They'd still be taking away his right to coach the team, which is breaking the contract. Neither side has "loyalty" when it comes to coaches contracts. Both franchise/school and coach are looking out for themselves. As they should be doing.

You can't tell me firing a coach and being on the hook for alll money in the remaining years = a coach leaving a team high and dry at the most critical time of the year, while owing the school nothing. "Taking away his right to coach"? He has the right to go coach somewhere else, or to take a three year paid vacation. As we learn more and more about how Jags went about it, that is where I and many have a problem. Looks like now he's been tanking his recruiting efforts and putting out feelers to the NFL for weeks now, without telling BC about it. All who have been paying attention this recruiting season have been wondering why we had so few commits this late - now we know the answer.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Idiotic decision by BC. What coach will want to coach there now? I mean the guy was just interviewing for the job. The only scenario I could possibly see was that Jagodzinksi promised BC that he would be there longterm.

I have no doubt this is the case. BC went way out on a limb to give this guy his first HC job, and they paid him more than they've paid any other coachin their history. In return Jags promised DiFilippo he'd stick around for at least three years and now he's reneged on that promise.

at the same time, do you think that if this guys went 2-10 this year and 3-9 next season that BC would remain loyal to him?

doubtful at best

They'd have to pay him. It's a guaranteed contract. Big difference.

They'd still be taking away his right to coach the team, which is breaking the contract. Neither side has "loyalty" when it comes to coaches contracts. Both franchise/school and coach are looking out for themselves. As they should be doing.

You can't tell me firing a coach and being on the hook for alll money in the remaining years = a coach leaving a team high and dry at the most critical time of the year, while owing the school nothing. "Taking away his right to coach"? He has the right to go coach somewhere else, or to take a three year paid vacation. As we learn more and more about how Jags went about it, that is where I and many have a problem. Looks like now he's been tanking his recruiting efforts and putting out feelers to the NFL for weeks now, without telling BC about it. All who have been paying attention this recruiting season have been wondering why we had so few commits this late - now we know the answer.

Um, Jags interviewed for one job in which he was a longshot to get all along. That's not leaving anyone high and dry. BC is telling Jags to get lost; not the other way around. So what if he's putting feelers out there. If he wants to get back into the NFL because he likes that over college coaching that's his right. We all look for bigger and better jobs from time to time.

And yes, firing a coach in the middle of his contract is disloyal. It puts a permanent mark on his resume that he was fired. It removes him from the coaching circle. Yes, he can get another job but at the same time, BC can go get another coach after Jags leaves. Neither side is loyal in that relationship.

 

[Boston]

There's a lot of generalties going around here. If a coach is doing a lousy job (i.e. losing, violations or fan disinterest) than firing him isn't disloyal. If he's coming off of 10-2 seasons running a clean program and gets fired than that's being dislyoal. Like any other profession if you're not performing up to certain standards than you're probably going to get canned. The good news for coaches is you can absolutely suck or lie to your boss and still get the remainder of your contract. Sorry, but that's not disloyalty...that's a great benefit.

As for BC I find it hard to believe that people have an issue with them. They have a coach openly looking for another job. That is not open for debate. Right now he's attempting to leave them for another opportunity that only benefits him and not the program. Obviously, this is par for the course in college football and no one should be surprised. Yet, not only is he looking to work elsewhere but he is doing it a manner (i.e. secretive and what looks like lying as well) where there's zero concern for his current program...after only two years on the job. There's nothing about this situation that benefits the BC program. So, with that going on his boss should just sit back and allow the program to be rudderless until Jags decides what's best for him? He should continue employing a coach who's actions have made it obvious he is not long for the job? Unless new facts surface I applaud Gene DeFillipo for his stand here. His job is to ensure a long-term quality program and it's become very apparent from this situation that having Jags as the HC will not help with that goal.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

There's a lot of generalties going around here. If a coach is doing a lousy job (i.e. losing, violations or fan disinterest) than firing him isn't disloyal. If he's coming off of 10-2 seasons running a clean program and gets fired than that's being dislyoal. Like any other profession if you're not performing up to certain standards than you're probably going to get canned. The good news for coaches is you can absolutely suck or lie to your boss and still get the remainder of your contract. Sorry, but that's not disloyalty...that's a great benefit.As for BC I find it hard to believe that people have an issue with them. They have a coach openly looking for another job. That is not open for debate. Right now he's attempting to leave them for another opportunity that only benefits him and not the program. Obviously, this is par for the course in college football and no one should be surprised. Yet, not only is he looking to work elsewhere but he is doing it a manner (i.e. secretive and what looks like lying as well) where there's zero concern for his current program...after only two years on the job. There's nothing about this situation that benefits the BC program. So, with that going on his boss should just sit back and allow the program to be rudderless until Jags decides what's best for him? He should continue employing a coach who's actions have made it obvious he is not long for the job? Unless new facts surface I applaud Gene DeFillipo for his stand here. His job is to ensure a long-term quality program and it's become very apparent from this situation that having Jags as the HC will not help with that goal.

So the Buffalo AD is kind of a weeny for not canning Turner Gill, who is openly whoring himself around for a better job. Even though it would be stupid to can the guy instead of getting as much as you can from him. Not sure why BC would can a guy that has 2 ACC Championship Game appearances in 2 years. Even if you only get one more year out of him, that's better than nothing. Gives you a year to start looking for the best replacement too. If GDF wants to fire Jags, that's his right. But doing so because Jags did not inform him he was interviewing or because he's interviewing is poor business and isn't going to attract many good coaches to want to work for you.

 

[Boston]

There's a lot of generalties going around here. If a coach is doing a lousy job (i.e. losing, violations or fan disinterest) than firing him isn't disloyal. If he's coming off of 10-2 seasons running a clean program and gets fired than that's being dislyoal. Like any other profession if you're not performing up to certain standards than you're probably going to get canned. The good news for coaches is you can absolutely suck or lie to your boss and still get the remainder of your contract. Sorry, but that's not disloyalty...that's a great benefit.As for BC I find it hard to believe that people have an issue with them. They have a coach openly looking for another job. That is not open for debate. Right now he's attempting to leave them for another opportunity that only benefits him and not the program. Obviously, this is par for the course in college football and no one should be surprised. Yet, not only is he looking to work elsewhere but he is doing it a manner (i.e. secretive and what looks like lying as well) where there's zero concern for his current program...after only two years on the job. There's nothing about this situation that benefits the BC program. So, with that going on his boss should just sit back and allow the program to be rudderless until Jags decides what's best for him? He should continue employing a coach who's actions have made it obvious he is not long for the job? Unless new facts surface I applaud Gene DeFillipo for his stand here. His job is to ensure a long-term quality program and it's become very apparent from this situation that having Jags as the HC will not help with that goal.

So the Buffalo AD is kind of a weeny for not canning Turner Gill, who is openly whoring himself around for a better job. Even though it would be stupid to can the guy instead of getting as much as you can from him. Not sure why BC would can a guy that has 2 ACC Championship Game appearances in 2 years. Even if you only get one more year out of him, that's better than nothing. Gives you a year to start looking for the best replacement too. If GDF wants to fire Jags, that's his right. But doing so because Jags did not inform him he was interviewing or because he's interviewing is poor business and isn't going to attract many good coaches to want to work for you.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. My guess is lying to your boss and not returning calls from him isn't something most ADs are looking for in a HC.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

There's a lot of generalties going around here. If a coach is doing a lousy job (i.e. losing, violations or fan disinterest) than firing him isn't disloyal. If he's coming off of 10-2 seasons running a clean program and gets fired than that's being dislyoal. Like any other profession if you're not performing up to certain standards than you're probably going to get canned. The good news for coaches is you can absolutely suck or lie to your boss and still get the remainder of your contract. Sorry, but that's not disloyalty...that's a great benefit.As for BC I find it hard to believe that people have an issue with them. They have a coach openly looking for another job. That is not open for debate. Right now he's attempting to leave them for another opportunity that only benefits him and not the program. Obviously, this is par for the course in college football and no one should be surprised. Yet, not only is he looking to work elsewhere but he is doing it a manner (i.e. secretive and what looks like lying as well) where there's zero concern for his current program...after only two years on the job. There's nothing about this situation that benefits the BC program. So, with that going on his boss should just sit back and allow the program to be rudderless until Jags decides what's best for him? He should continue employing a coach who's actions have made it obvious he is not long for the job? Unless new facts surface I applaud Gene DeFillipo for his stand here. His job is to ensure a long-term quality program and it's become very apparent from this situation that having Jags as the HC will not help with that goal.

So the Buffalo AD is kind of a weeny for not canning Turner Gill, who is openly whoring himself around for a better job. Even though it would be stupid to can the guy instead of getting as much as you can from him. Not sure why BC would can a guy that has 2 ACC Championship Game appearances in 2 years. Even if you only get one more year out of him, that's better than nothing. Gives you a year to start looking for the best replacement too. If GDF wants to fire Jags, that's his right. But doing so because Jags did not inform him he was interviewing or because he's interviewing is poor business and isn't going to attract many good coaches to want to work for you.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. My guess is lying to your boss and not returning calls from him isn't something most ADs are looking for in a HC.

Link to him lying and not returning calls?Most sources are saying that GDF found out about the NYJ Saturday and called Jags to confirm it and Jags told him it was true. GDF was pissed he didn't know about it from Jags before finding out from the media. Which is understandable but still stupid to fire someone over it if you expect good coaches to line up and want to work for you.There's also a lot of talk in the media that Jags contract says he could not interview for 3 years. I'm hearing from some BC acquaintances that is false and there was only a verbal agreement. That's poor business by GDF, if true. GDF is acting as if BC is a top-level job that should attract a top coach to stay forever and ever. It isn't. There are few of those in college especially if you hire a guy from the NFL. Of course that guy probably wants to get back to the NFL one day especially if he's motivated to reach his coaching potential.

 

[Boston]

There's a lot of generalties going around here. If a coach is doing a lousy job (i.e. losing, violations or fan disinterest) than firing him isn't disloyal. If he's coming off of 10-2 seasons running a clean program and gets fired than that's being dislyoal. Like any other profession if you're not performing up to certain standards than you're probably going to get canned. The good news for coaches is you can absolutely suck or lie to your boss and still get the remainder of your contract. Sorry, but that's not disloyalty...that's a great benefit.As for BC I find it hard to believe that people have an issue with them. They have a coach openly looking for another job. That is not open for debate. Right now he's attempting to leave them for another opportunity that only benefits him and not the program. Obviously, this is par for the course in college football and no one should be surprised. Yet, not only is he looking to work elsewhere but he is doing it a manner (i.e. secretive and what looks like lying as well) where there's zero concern for his current program...after only two years on the job. There's nothing about this situation that benefits the BC program. So, with that going on his boss should just sit back and allow the program to be rudderless until Jags decides what's best for him? He should continue employing a coach who's actions have made it obvious he is not long for the job? Unless new facts surface I applaud Gene DeFillipo for his stand here. His job is to ensure a long-term quality program and it's become very apparent from this situation that having Jags as the HC will not help with that goal.

So the Buffalo AD is kind of a weeny for not canning Turner Gill, who is openly whoring himself around for a better job. Even though it would be stupid to can the guy instead of getting as much as you can from him. Not sure why BC would can a guy that has 2 ACC Championship Game appearances in 2 years. Even if you only get one more year out of him, that's better than nothing. Gives you a year to start looking for the best replacement too. If GDF wants to fire Jags, that's his right. But doing so because Jags did not inform him he was interviewing or because he's interviewing is poor business and isn't going to attract many good coaches to want to work for you.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. My guess is lying to your boss and not returning calls from him isn't something most ADs are looking for in a HC.

Link to him lying and not returning calls?Most sources are saying that GDF found out about the NYJ Saturday and called Jags to confirm it and Jags told him it was true. GDF was pissed he didn't know about it from Jags before finding out from the media. Which is understandable but still stupid to fire someone over it if you expect good coaches to line up and want to work for you.There's also a lot of talk in the media that Jags contract says he could not interview for 3 years. I'm hearing from some BC acquaintances that is false and there was only a verbal agreement. That's poor business by GDF, if true. GDF is acting as if BC is a top-level job that should attract a top coach to stay forever and ever. It isn't. There are few of those in college especially if you hire a guy from the NFL. Of course that guy probably wants to get back to the NFL one day especially if he's motivated to reach his coaching potential.

IMO I think you're totally missing the point on what BC thinks. I think BC totally understands it's a potential steppingstone school. It's big time enough that any coach that does well there is a prime candidate for a major job like the Jacksonville Jags (Coughlin) or a job with unlimited resources (i.e. NC State and O'Brien) but by no means is it a Ohio State or LSU. I don't think they have any illusions otherwise. Due to that I think they are doing everything in their power so that they don't get blatantly used (i.e. two years and out like Jags) and turn into a program that's constantly influx and unstable. I don't think it's a fluke that York and Skinner are long-timers (I understand hockey is different beceause BC is a legit power) as was O'Brien. From all appearances this is one of the main factors BC is using to pick a coach and to have a guy want to leave after two years would seem to totally go against what BC is striving for. So, while Jags can do what he wants it would be foolish for DeFillipo to entrust the most important program in the school to a guy who appears to be a short-timer.