As I read the sports page or an online article I read another story of an athlete who is asking to be traded! Yes he is under contract but for some reason he doesn’t want to play for that team anymore. Then I flip the page and read another article that Lane Kiffin is being sued by Tennessee for luring away Kennedy Pola who was under contract with the Tennessee Titans and by the way had only been with them for 5 months.
I don’t understand! Please help me understand all this! Please shed some clarity on all of this! This post isn’t about the examples I gave you but really about follow through! If you sign a contract, honor the contract! Isn’t it as simple as that? I get that athletes and to some extent coaches only can play or coach for so long and they need make as much money as they can. Honoring a contract is something you should think about prior to signing and certainly when you have a pen in your hand. I am getting very tired of professional coaches who are under contract jumping ship, going to another team! If you always wanted to coach for your alma mater than here is an idea (not that creative) put that in your contract. Sign a five year deal plan to stay for 5 years and if for some reason you teams don’t do well and you get fired then that team will pay you the remainder of your contract.
I really don’t get it!
- Am I the only one tired of this?
- Does anyone have any answers?
- Am I looking at this the wrong way?
I look forward to hearing from you!
Dan Womack says:
It’s not the pros, but I have two words for you: Rich Rodriquez! Poster boy for slimy contract walkouts.
As a WVU fan (can you tell) I am totally with you on this one. Rich Rod broke his contract and left a week before one of the school’s (his Alma Mater, by the way) biggest bowl games ever.
Michael Braunberg says:
Sorry Merrill, but your lament seems a bit quixotic. Sports organizations regularly cut and trade players. Fans love coaches and players when they win, but turn on them when they lose. Most NFL player contracts are not even guaranteed. My guess is that players and coaches understand perfectly well the mercenary nature of their industries. I’m no lawyer, but it seems that contracts are merely stipulations of the rights and obligations of parties for the duration of the contract. Dissolving such contracts is as American as apple pie. Just look at the divorce rate.
I am sure there are plenty of fans out there who only WISH the coach of their favorite team would ask out of their contract. They might even have a parade.
Ed Sugar says:
As my mentor, BLB, reminds on many occasions “Everything is negotiable”
Gary Lawson says:
One of my favorite topics. First, contracts, all contracts should be honored. If you think you might want an “out” negotiate on what terms, ball players, tenants, even giant employers like our local governments.
Haven’t you read all the “pension envy” in local media. Our civil servants are over paid. Do you think they are over aaid when they run after a fleeing felon or stand on top of a burning building? No. I doubt it. What about when they loose their limb in a garbage truck or just get bit by the neighbor’s dog. Not then either I suspect. But, listen to the Mayors and City Council members in Dallas and Ft Worth and they suggest that they can break the contract to these civil servants, and why? So that they can solve the budget problems, No. So they can LOOK like they are solving them and run for higher office.
So, why do you care if a ball player exercises an “out”? Believe me the contracts were negotiated between titan owners and player’s represented by counsel. If they breach the contract, they should be sued and held accountable. That’s my two cents.
Marc Dresner says:
As a Chicagoan, naturally I have some pretty strong opinions about contracts – legal and otherwise (re: fans v owners, in particular). But I’m curious if this topic also applies to market research. Thoughts? ;P
Merrill Dubrow says:
Marc,
Appreciate your question. I strongly believe it applies to everything including research. If you have signed a contract (and yes I have a number of times) you should honor it. If it has certain language around non-solicitation, clients, products etc you shouldn’t do anything that comprises what you have signed. Sometimes when you leave a company the two parties can sit down and come up with alternative solutions to change a contract but if that isn’t done both parties should honor what is signed. Don’t you agree?
Merrill
Michael Braunberg says:
Leave it to me to beat the dead horse on a thread which seems not to have generated particular interest, but this reminds me of the CNN anchor Campbell Brown who asked out of her contract because her ratings were so awful she felt she was doing the network a disservice. CNN was happy to oblige her.
Most people would agree that we are bound by our obligations, and indeed, one might argue that honoring such obligations is the glue that holds the human enterprise together. I think the bedeviling aspect of this thread is the concept of contracts. Contracts range from the simple to the complex, and expectations of the obligations of parties to contracts vary by industry and purpose. Not every instance of an attempt to dissolve or change a contract prior to its expiration is necessarily evidence of moral, ethical or legal lapse.
Merrill Dubrow says:
Michael,
I appreciate your comments and agree that sometimes changing a contract afterwards can be viewed as ok as long as both parties as discussing it. My issue is and will always be when one of the parties once to change the terms or totally disregard what was signed without speaking with the other party. That really is my issue. In the past I have had a contract that was changed after I left a company. It was at the request of the company and I did oblige after a few discussions and concessions on their end as well. It really comes down to communication in my mind and most times the trouble will start when there is little or no communication.
Do you agree?
Thanks.
Merrill
Michael Braunberg says:
Agreed absolutely. Communication is key and good communication is, sadly, rarer than it should and could be. You have two or more actors and each actor has their own motives and often each somehow is simultaneously frustrated at their own inability to read minds, but habituated to acting as if others can read minds.
Don’t you love it when someone looks at you and asks “So, what do you think?” and then actually shuts up and listens to your reply? I have seen people reduced to stammering when honestly asked their point of view because they are so unfamiliar with the notion that anyone would give a damn what they think.
Thanks for the exchange, and go Red Sox!
Marc Dresner says:
Merrill-
I couldn’t agree more. Although I’ve observed instances where a contract – in this case a non-compete – that was undertaken in a certain spirit and with a certain understanding was ultimately abused.
I also find there are some unwritten contracts between providers and clients, as well as between an agency and its employees. These it seems to me are also not always honored, although I believe this is overwhelmingly the exception, not the rule.
For example, I’m sure we’ll all heard shoot-the-messenger stories where a research provider was retained under the pretense of conducting objective research, when the client’s objective was really only to support a pre-determined conclusion.
A highly reputable and extremely capable friend with a PhD and 30 years in MR ran into such a situation not long ago. The results, unfortunately for him, contradicted his client’s assumptions. As a result, the client demanded that the study be repeated, and this researcher actually obliged. To my friend’s credit, the results were replicated.
The client consequently brought in another (allegedly less ethical) research organization to repeat the study. Their findings supported the client’s agenda, and so the client refused to pay for the original study on the grounds that the researcher had been derelict. This of course has led to litigation w/ outcomes yet TBD…
Merrill Dubrow says:
Marc,
WOW – I will admit I haven’t heard of a ton of stories like that but that is certainly disturbing. I am sure most of us who have been in the research community have worked on a project where a client might not been 100% thrilled with the results but we have never been asked to do the study over.
I look forward to hearing the results of the case.
Thanks.
Merrill
Merrill Dubrow says:
UGH another unhappy athlete who doesn’t want to honor his contract!
Report: Rudy Fernandez won’t honor contract
Jason Quick of The Oregonian reports that Rudy Fernandez won’t report to training camp and has “no intention” of honoring the final two years of his contract with the Blazers.
According to Quick, Fernandez has no problem being suspended by the Blazers and sitting out until he can return to Spain in 2012. It’s possible that this is one last effort to leverage the Blazers into dealing him elsewhere, but it’s also possible that we’ve seen the last of Fernandez playing hoops for the next two years. Stay tuned.
Michael Braunberg says:
I checked out this store
Michael Braunberg says:
I checked out this story and can see why this sort of behavior would annoy you. Interesting that Fernandez’s agent says his player is looking for “an amicable divorce”.
Merrill Dubrow says:
Michael,
If I was Rudy I would have taken a different position. Ok he doesn’t want to play for Portland anymore and he wants to go back to Spain. I get that and understand what he is saying. Perhaps he should have thought of that prior to signing the contract OR his lawyer should have put in language In his contract that included an out close in case Rudy didn’t like playing in the USA. With that said he also could do a few things right now – like plan on playing with the Blazers until BOTH parties get the situation resolved or perhaps BUY his way out of his contract. He may have gotten a huge sign on bonus or had a front loaded contract. Just a few thoughts – instead most athletes these days will put a steak in the ground, not move off their position and have a situation get really ugly. He says he wants “an amicable divorce”. but what exactly does that mean? Seems to me that there could be some solutions –
Thanks Michael – look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Merrill
Michael Braunberg says:
I agree with your analysis, and I do think Fernandez should play until something can be worked out. Without knowing the background, it looks like an amicable divorce means “My way or the highway.”
More generally, so long as sport’s organizations are more interested in the possibilities of a player’s performance than they are with the a player’s character, and as long as fans are willing to root for anyone just so long as they win, this sort of thing will go on and on. I wonder if anyone ever really evaluated Fernandez in regard to his ability to cope with cultural transition, his willingness to accept reduced playing time etc.
The sports world is crazy. How often do you say of an employee, “Well, okay, the guy does have a habit of getting charged with rape, and it is true that he is usually late and never takes part in any of our optional training opportunities, and that marijuana smell coming out of his office does get a bit annoying, but just look at these great sales numbers!” Sports organizations apparently engage in this sort of thinking with some regularity.
It is said that if you lay down with dogs, you are going to get fleas, but apparently in the bizarre world of sport there is an alchemy at work which transforms fleas into gold rings.
Have a good one!
Merrill Dubrow says:
Another athlete who doesn’t want to honor his contract:
Citing NFL sources, Newsday’s Bob Glauber reports that Darrelle Revis is “demanding” $162 million over 10 years from the Jets.
The Jets are reportedly offering as much as $122 million over 10 years. None of these figures mean much without the guaranteed money, but Revis’ demands are ridiculous if true. While he’s certainly outplayed his rookie contract, he still has three years left on that deal. Based on info from his own sources,