• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Pflu and UM agree to buy-out terms

well then, good thing i was wearing my tin foil hat when you rained on my parade
i'll have to read the paper tomorrow to see now who's gonna get the squeeze.
 
tnt said:
Tokyogriz said:
Pflu - $157,000 PLUS health insurance benefits & 44,500 = $201,000 (plus benefits cost)

Oday - $155,281 (Plus Benefits)

Total cost of Royce Engstrom not doing his job and giving yearly reviews in January is $356,781 plus additional benifits costs.

If Royce had simply done his january employee reviews (which is part of his job and he never gave one to oday in 2 years) he could have simply said he wasnt renewing contracts. In the case of Oday at least and saved UM a HUGE chunk of money. With Pflu we would have saved at least the $44,000.

Now UM will pay double salaries for these positions this year. How many professors would we have paid with this $356,000?

This should come out of Royce Engstroms paycheck. Or an even better solution would be to non-renew his contract effective IMMEDIATELY!

Total cost to UM and UM athletics is going to be much larger than this initial pricetag as well. Engstrom needs to be held accountable for this.
Click to expand...

Or he could have fired them with cause sent them packing and treated them with no respect and hurt their future careers. AND there is always cause to be found........
Click to expand...

Absolute bullshit brochaco...we all realize your agenda here, you've made it clear. If the Royster tried to fire with cause it would cost the school a lot of dollars more than they will be paying. You are not particularly credible here on this issue.
 
tnt said:
Tokyogriz said:
Pflu - $157,000 PLUS health insurance benefits & 44,500 = $201,000 (plus benefits cost)

Oday - $155,281 (Plus Benefits)

Total cost of Royce Engstrom not doing his job and giving yearly reviews in January is $356,781 plus additional benifits costs.

If Royce had simply done his january employee reviews (which is part of his job and he never gave one to oday in 2 years) he could have simply said he wasnt renewing contracts. In the case of Oday at least and saved UM a HUGE chunk of money. With Pflu we would have saved at least the $44,000.

Now UM will pay double salaries for these positions this year. How many professors would we have paid with this $356,000?

This should come out of Royce Engstroms paycheck. Or an even better solution would be to non-renew his contract effective IMMEDIATELY!

Total cost to UM and UM athletics is going to be much larger than this initial pricetag as well. Engstrom needs to be held accountable for this.
Click to expand...

Or he could have fired them with cause sent them packing and treated them with no respect and hurt their future careers. AND there is always cause to be found........
Click to expand...

Absolute bullshit brochaco...we all realize your agenda here, you've made it clear. If the Royster tried to fire with cause it would cost the school a lot of dollars more than they will be paying. You are not particularly credible here on this issue.
 
Tokyogriz said:
goatcreekgriz said:
Looks like it adds up to what he's entitled to as a state employee through the end of the year. Not quite a million bucks.
Click to expand...

$235,278 including his benefits.

Not chump change either is it. Add O'Days $155,000 for his full year payment and we are at a $390,278.

Half a million dollars sure would have gone a long ways in any department on campus.
Click to expand...
Half a million dollars is the real estate commission on a good sale in Bev Hills, Malibu, Encino, Pasadena..trust me, I know...it is peanuts compared to the coaches in the "move up area" of the BCS....think big, kid.
 
The funny part about all of this is if the Griz had lost two more games this past year and failed to make the playoffs, every poster here would have been calling for Pflu to be let go. Under that scenario the buy-out would have been the same and everyone on here would have been arguing it was money well spent and worth it to get another coach that could win football games. Instead, he was not retained for reasons no on on here knows and yet now it is a complete waste of money that could be used for other expenses.

The sad part is that had Pflu been let go for losing two more football games and it cost the University $220k that really would have been a waste. If he was let go because he was not living up to the standards of a College coach off the field, was not taking the actions necessary to maintain the integrity of the program, and was failing to guide the young men in the program in a manner that will help them become productive citizens, then spending an additional $220k was probably well worth it and may have saved the university considerable money down the road.
 
doebrmn said:
If he was let go because he was not living up to the standards of a College coach off the field, was not taking the actions necessary to maintain the integrity of the program, and was failing to guide the young men in the program in a manner that will help them become productive citizens, then spending an additional $220k was probably well worth it and may have saved the university considerable money down the road.
Click to expand...

You have no idea what your talking about on this. Its obvious you do not know Pflugrad and have done zero research on any of your b-s accusation/speculation.

The only actual team issue was a grade issue last fall in my research. The emails show Oday and Pflugrad trying to get these addressed and hopefully most those kids have their act together this spring. We will find out in the fall.
 
Read the whole post before you go running off at the mouth. As stated, I do not know the reasons. My point was IF he was let go for issues off the field those are far more important then what is happening on the field and spending the money was likely a necessary expense. In the future, try to read the post instead of simply jumping on every opportunity to let everyone know you are a big Pflu supporter. We get that, but until (which may never be the case) the facts are know, try to maintain some modicum of objectivity.
 
doebrmn said:
The funny part about all of this is if the Griz had lost two more games this past year and failed to make the playoffs, every poster here would have been calling for Pflu to be let go. Under that scenario the buy-out would have been the same and everyone on here would have been arguing it was money well spent and worth it to get another coach that could win football games. Instead, he was not retained for reasons no on on here knows and yet now it is a complete waste of money that could be used for other expenses.

The sad part is that had Pflu been let go for losing two more football games and it cost the University $220k that really would have been a waste. If he was let go because he was not living up to the standards of a College coach off the field, was not taking the actions necessary to maintain the integrity of the program, and was failing to guide the young men in the program in a manner that will help them become productive citizens, then spending an additional $220k was probably well worth it and may have saved the university considerable money down the road.
Click to expand...

It was only by the grace of god he didn't lose two (and maybe three) more games. It was rare at best that he ever had two halves put together and even rarer that he looked prepared for the first half. He didn't look a bit better his second season than his first.

All that aside doebrmn make an excellent post, and hits the nail EXACTLY on the head why a change needed made. Its NOT about winning, but all is forgiven if we do. The academic problems would be enough for me absolutely NO excuse to get to the point we were......
 
tnt said:
doebrmn said:
The funny part about all of this is if the Griz had lost two more games this past year and failed to make the playoffs, every poster here would have been calling for Pflu to be let go. Under that scenario the buy-out would have been the same and everyone on here would have been arguing it was money well spent and worth it to get another coach that could win football games. Instead, he was not retained for reasons no on on here knows and yet now it is a complete waste of money that could be used for other expenses.

The sad part is that had Pflu been let go for losing two more football games and it cost the University $220k that really would have been a waste. If he was let go because he was not living up to the standards of a College coach off the field, was not taking the actions necessary to maintain the integrity of the program, and was failing to guide the young men in the program in a manner that will help them become productive citizens, then spending an additional $220k was probably well worth it and may have saved the university considerable money down the road.
Click to expand...

It was only by the grace of god he didn't lose two (and maybe three) more games. It was rare at best that he ever had two halves put together and even rarer that he looked prepared for the first half. He didn't look a bit better his second season than his first.
Click to expand...

Ha-ha, that is a funny post, TNT. If you couldn't see how significantly different and better the team looked and played from '10 to '11, then I'm sorry but you don't understand football. This may also help explain some of your posts, which I find to be completely out to lunch.
 
What didn't change PR was the consistencey. When they were good, they were very good when not..... If the lack of discipline wasn't apparent, you don't understand what practice is for. When academic problems follow inconsistent performance, the lack of leadership becomes even more apparent. When those two things are followed by party fouls, its only a matter of time until everything falls apart.
 
tnt said:
What didn't change PR was the consistencey. When they were good, they were very good when not..... If the lack of discipline wasn't apparent, you don't understand what practice is for. When academic problems follow inconsistent performance, the lack of leadership becomes even more apparent. When those two things are followed by party fouls, its only a matter of time until everything falls apart.
Click to expand...

Note that UM football doesn't have academic problems. I believe there are about a half dozen players with academic issues. That is lower than it often is at this time of the year.

There wasn't a lack of discipline on the field last year. The defense was consistently good all season, with the exception of a game or so. The offense was inconsistent, but that was due more to JJ's injuries than anything else. When he healed up later in the season and then played well, the offense was very good.
 
The defense was consistently okay (except a game or two) They were also starting to get consistently burned, a trend that started in 10 and continued. The offensive problems were missed assignments, slow development not injuries. It became great sport in our section to call the moves of each play as it developed. We were right more often than not. This would NOT have been a good year, you can't depend on luck, and injuries on the other side to win games (although it sure helps)

It wasn't enough to fire a coach for, the point is had things gone the opposite way a few times as they easily could have. There would have been few who would have thought buying out his contract and sending him down the road would have been a bad idea.
 
GrizMusician said:
Fantastic... so tell me... who's money is paying for two head coaches, & two ADs?
Click to expand...

The cost is not NEAR as much as they pay offs would indicate, and in light of a fifteen and half million budget, not a lot of money. We don't have two of everything either. We have folks who have moved up but old positions not filled. assitant coaches gone (and buying out their contracts) We have a higher number of in state scholarships (a big savings) Pretty easy to trim the money.

If the school contribution goes up, it doesn't represent "real money" there is not a lot of direct cost involved with scholarships mostly accounting. And as we know the accounting can be pretty creative in the athletic department.
 
tnt....all of the costs are yet to be counted. How do you measure the damage done to the reputation of UM, not to mention future settlements and litigation. :roll:
 
Spanky said:
tnt....all of the costs are yet to be counted. How do you measure the damage done to the reputation of UM, not to mention future settlements and litigation. :roll:
Click to expand...


I wasn't the one measuring it. I agree though its going to be hard to get the reputation we once had back. I'm hopeful that the DOE and DOJ investigations will confirm the University did everything correctly (or mostly) which may mitigate settlements with the victims. At least one of the victims may have a case against the Missoulian (I hope)

I'm hoping the NCAA investigation involves other matters than academics and academic eligibility which seems to be an issue. The actions they take if we had an ineligible player could be pretty severe. If the question is unequal advantage, then it could be minor as we have already taken corrective action.

The one good thing about academics is given JJ's GPA they would be fools to get rid of him. It would bring the whole thing down, hes a 4.0 or close isn't he??

I know you weren't talking about canning coaches.....
 
tnt, I might or might not like you but you seem to be a Griz fan of sorts so I am placing you on a type of "positive dissenter." Your posts tend to imitate a doily. Positive on positive, otherwise you tend to disqualify and distort certain items of which you talk. You of course keep on telling it from your perspective and I will follow along assuming a double negative.
 
Umista said:
tnt, I might or might not like you but you seem to be a Griz fan of sorts so I am placing you on a type of "positive dissenter." Your posts tend to imitate a doily. Positive on positive, otherwise you tend to disqualify and distort certain items of which you talk. You of course keep on telling it from your perspective and I will follow along assuming a double negative.
Click to expand...


Assume EXTREME sarcasm, and a contrarian nature. But doily? Puhlease....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top