More RR whining about WVU

RE: More RR whining about WVU (egami)

Wed, 21 May 2008 13:22:44 GMT

ORIGINAL: wingedtipped66

Being in the food industry i would like to clear a few things first tipping is always optional? I guess if you want to go and be waited on cooked for and not have to clear the table do the dishes and cook the food then yes it's optional. Wait persons make around 2.90 to 3.25 an hour we rely on tips. So if anyone is so *&^%$#@ tight as to be served and think it's optional stay home make your own damn food and clear it and do your dishes. I know that this wasn't what this forum started out as but it just rubs me raw that people still think it's optional. The next time you (anyone) go out to dinner just remember what your server makes an hour and how most(not all) try to give you a good dining expirience, and then if you can in good concience not tip........

lol...

I don't think that's quite what was intended by the comment.

RE: More RR whining about WVU (OC Michigan Fan)

Wed, 21 May 2008 13:17:16 GMT

Being in the food industry i would like to clear a few things first tipping is always optional? I guess if you want to go and be waited on cooked for and not have to clear the table do the dishes and cook the food then yes it's optional. Wait persons make around 2.90 to 3.25 an hour we rely on tips. So if anyone is so *&^%$#@ tight as to be served and think it's optional stay home make your own damn food and clear it and do your dishes. I know that this wasn't what this forum started out as but it just rubs me raw that people still think it's optional. The next time you (anyone) go out to dinner just remember what your server makes an hour and how most(not all) try to give you a good dining expirience, and then if you can in good concience not tip........

Wait, I think I missed something. So does RR have a second job as a bus boy, or did his contract prohibit tipping, and he left 20%?

Wingedtipped, can you say "Everything Forum?"

RE: More RR whining about WVU (scmgoblue)

Wed, 21 May 2008 12:55:22 GMT

ORIGINAL: wingedtipped66

Being in the food industry i would like to clear a few things first tipping is always optional? I guess if you want to go and be waited on cooked for and not have to clear the table do the dishes and cook the food then yes it's optional. Wait persons make around 2.90 to 3.25 an hour we rely on tips. So if anyone is so *&^%$#@ tight as to be served and think it's optional stay home make your own damn food and clear it and do your dishes. I know that this wasn't what this forum started out as but it just rubs me raw that people still think it's optional. The next time you (anyone) go out to dinner just remember what your server makes an hour and how most(not all) try to give you a good dining expirience, and then if you can in good concience not tip........

Woah-ho! It was simply a response to a joke... sheesh. We're all well aware of the fact that wait-persons rely on tips, thanks. I have no problem tipping whatsoever, but that doesn't mean it's guaranteed. The times I have declined to tip have always centered on the wait person being terrible or flat out disrespectful, not me being "tight".

RE: More RR whining about WVU (wingedtipped66)

Wed, 21 May 2008 11:01:55 GMT

Being in the food industry i would like to clear a few things first tipping is always optional? I guess if you want to go and be waited on cooked for and not have to clear the table do the dishes and cook the food then yes it's optional. Wait persons make around 2.90 to 3.25 an hour we rely on tips. So if anyone is so *&^%$#@ tight as to be served and think it's optional stay home make your own damn food and clear it and do your dishes. I know that this wasn't what this forum started out as but it just rubs me raw that people still think it's optional. The next time you (anyone) go out to dinner just remember what your server makes an hour and how most(not all) try to give you a good dining expirience, and then if you can in good concience not tip........

RE: More RR whining about WVU (Buckeyes85)

Wed, 21 May 2008 10:13:43 GMT

ORIGINAL: ZooWolverine

B85, I am very much not a lawyer, so I was wondering if you could clarify whether the use of liquidated damages as the buyout would be problematic or if that is standard and no big deal. I read that liquidated damages specifically cannot be used as a penalty so, even though he agreed to $4 million as an estimate of the damages WVU has faced, if it's clear that they haven't had that kind of damage from his leaving the judge could reduce the amount RR needs to pay significantly. Is there any validity to that?

You are correct that liquidated damages are not intended to be punitive. So yes, if the judge should make that determination RRod could benefit. (I do not know if the judge would even consider the 4 million a liquidated damages clause, or simply an agreement by the parties as to how one or the other could get out of performing the remainder of the contract). Liquidated damages are intended to replace actual damages in situations where actual damages would be hard to prove. For instance, how would WVU prove a particular dollar figure as to the damage suffered by the program for RRod leaving early? How long would it take for the true damages to be known? Certainly not right now, and perhaps not for a number of years. Thus, a pre set buy out number.

But for a liquidated damages clause to be deemed punitive, and thereby unenforceable, the amount has to seem way out of proportion to what the real damages might have been. When you are talking about a multi-million dollar contract, a 4 million buyout clause does not shock you as being unreasonable.

RE: More RR whining about WVU (ZooWolverine)

Wed, 21 May 2008 08:50:44 GMT

B85, I am very much not a lawyer, so I was wondering if you could clarify whether the use of liquidated damages as the buyout would be problematic or if that is standard and no big deal. I read that liquidated damages specifically cannot be used as a penalty so, even though he agreed to $4 million as an estimate of the damages WVU has faced, if it's clear that they haven't had that kind of damage from his leaving the judge could reduce the amount RR needs to pay significantly. Is there any validity to that?

RE: More RR whining about WVU (Buckeyes85)

Mon, 19 May 2008 16:49:59 GMT

Well since we lawyers always hedge our bets, I could never say it's impossible that he gets it thrown out altogether, but I find it very, very unlikely. So yes, I think he is just trying to battle them to a settlement. If he truly doesn't have the cash, he should borrow a few million, settle with WVU and move on.

I don't know how the boosters would fit into this but raising 4 million cash so a rich dude can continue to be rich might be tough. I don't think UM can or would pay for it unless that was part of the negotiations. If it was, it would have been part of the contract and they would have taken care of it already. But I don't think they would ever have agreed to it. And how would they have sold that to the alumni and other boosters? That they agreed to pay RRod x per year, AND give him a 4 million incentive by paying off his buy out? I think he made a bad deal when he agreed to that buy out and it would make UM look bad to essentially eat his mistake.

If I was a betting man, RRod told Martin that he could take care of the buy out from his end. That's why the minute he landed back in WVU he started setting the table for the "you didn't do what you promised to do" argument. If true that wasn't a very good plan by Martin because UM has suffered collateral damage due to RRod's protracted dispute.

RE: More RR whining about WVU (scmgoblue)

Mon, 19 May 2008 13:05:10 GMT

B85, thanks for the clarification... so then this is what he has to do to have any chance of reducing the buyout, the idea that it would be thrown out completely is impossible. This whole thing is tough, I don't exactly feel Rodriguez is being a complete slime-ball considering the way things apparently were handled in Morgantown towards the end, but at the same time, this is going to be a BIG distraction if this nonsense goes into the season. If he's as fully committed to the U of M as he says he is, then he needs to deal with this NOW. It needs to be handled and put behind everyone.

The question that none of us seems to have an answer to is where does the U of M and the AD boosters fit into this equation? It's been said countlessly, but this had to be issue "1A" at the contract talks and in any discussion beforehand of even offering the position to Rodriguez. Do you think Martin and Coleman were satisfied with a "my lawyers and I will handle it" type of response? I guess I don't know, I don't have any real read on the way it would've played out, but I have to think there is a plan in place to take care of this 4 million. If that's the case, why don't we just pay the stupid thing and end this?

RE: More RR whining about WVU (DownInFront417)

Mon, 19 May 2008 12:44:42 GMT

ORIGINAL: UMWingedHelmet

I have a question. Will he really get a fair trial in WVA?

RE: More RR whining about WVU (Buckeyes85)

Mon, 19 May 2008 12:23:19 GMT

ORIGINAL: MichiganFanInOhio

ORIGINAL: Buckeyes85
It may appear I have my Scarlet covered glasses on when I say this is an absolutely idiotic legal argument for RR or his attorneys to even make. Perhaps he just wants to put up a defense so that he can bargain but he cannot win on this argument. Period.

This is why I find it hard to believe that is so cut and dry as you make it out to appear Buckeye. Do you even know the entire scope of what it is that Coach Rodriguez and his lawyers are arguing? I would wager that none of us in this chat room know half of what's going on. I think Rodriguez is a smart enough man to realize whether he has a case or not. And furthermore, I'm sure that his team of lawyers are good enough to advise Rodriguez whether or not to pursue this and just how far to take it. There is obviously a case to be made or this thing wouldn't be dragging out as long as it has.

That said, I tend to side more with scm and egami in that I just wish it would all be done with so that parties on both sides can finally move on! Sadly, that doesn't appear to be the case.

Let me answer a few questions, first SCM's- I doubt this contract dispute will make it to trial. There are really few facts in dispute as to the enforceability of the buy out clause in the contract. Judge's decide issues of law; juries decide issues of fact. This appears to be almost completely a legal issue. If it does make it to trial, I suspect it will either be enforced, or not. I don't see how a jury could reduce it. It's what is called a liquidated damages provision in that the parties agree up front what the penalty will be. The question is whether WVU can enforce it. I suspect he is putting up a good fight to tried to negotiate this thing down. And that's how it should end if these people are smart.

Is the issue cut and dried? Yes on a few points it is. My post referred to RRod's depo testimony, and one of their defenses that he was promised that the buyout clause would be rescinded or not enforced. So what he is saying is that you told me you wouldn't enforce it, then you presented me with a contract that said you would, and the contract says I can't rely upon any prior promises, only those in the contract, and I agreed to only rely upon the promises in the contract, but now I want to escape the terms of the contract by claiming I relied upon prior promises that you wouldn't do exactly what the contract said you would do.

If an issue so clearly addressed in the written contract is not cut and dried, then again, written contracts would be absolutely useless. The adverse party could always just claim, "I know what the contract says, and I agreed to it, but you told me something else previously." Integrated contracts are drafted to avoid this specific argument. And amongst educated people that are represented by counsel, they are almost always enforced.

RE: More RR whining about WVU (MichiganFanInOhio)

Fri, 16 May 2008 10:46:20 GMT

ORIGINAL: Buckeyes85
It may appear I have my Scarlet covered glasses on when I say this is an absolutely idiotic legal argument for RR or his attorneys to even make. Perhaps he just wants to put up a defense so that he can bargain but he cannot win on this argument. Period.

This is why I find it hard to believe that is so cut and dry as you make it out to appear Buckeye. Do you even know the entire scope of what it is that Coach Rodriguez and his lawyers are arguing? I would wager that none of us in this chat room know half of what's going on. I think Rodriguez is a smart enough man to realize whether he has a case or not. And furthermore, I'm sure that his team of lawyers are good enough to advise Rodriguez whether or not to pursue this and just how far to take it. There is obviously a case to be made or this thing wouldn't be dragging out as long as it has.

That said, I tend to side more with scm and egami in that I just wish it would all be done with so that parties on both sides can finally move on! Sadly, that doesn't appear to be the case.

RE: More RR whining about WVU (UMWingedHelmet)

Thu, 15 May 2008 22:05:52 GMT

I have a question. Will he really get a fair trial in WVA?

RE: More RR whining about WVU (egami)

Thu, 15 May 2008 15:46:35 GMT

Yeah, it is hard to choose side based on the facts. I used to be staunchly in the "that was stupid camp", but the more I read about the internal e-mails that were released and read some bloggers who have done quite a bit of reading on it...seems like there could be more to it.

If this drags into the season it's going to become a distraction for the players.

RE: More RR whining about WVU (scmgoblue)

Thu, 15 May 2008 15:28:12 GMT

Thanks for the clarification B85, here's my question. Lets say this goes all the way to court, what chance does he possibly have of this being reduced? Furthermore, how long does that kind of process take?

I'm so sick and tired of dealing with this crap, it's hard not to choose sides here, but uh... get the stupid deal done with and move on.

RE: More RR whining about WVU (egami)

Thu, 15 May 2008 15:24:56 GMT

But his argument isn't that they are contradicting the contract. It's that they agreed to things verbally that were outside the scope of the contract. And if they gave verbal promises that they would address things as leverage to sign that contract for the time being you might be surprised how strong of a case he can make...especially with a high powered WVU donor willing to testify to that fact.

RE: More RR whining about WVU (Buckeyes85)

Thu, 15 May 2008 15:17:17 GMT

ORIGINAL: Philc

I'm not a lawyer but if somebody told me they expected to get something not specified in a contract I'd tell them that they're a moron.

RR had a team of "advisers" to help him navigate through this process he should blame them or himself.

The more pressure they put on him to sign without the adjustments he wanted the more he should have been suspicious.

Used care salesman all over the midwest salivate at the thought of meeting RR. A little pressure and he'll cave...

Correct. There is case law directly on point in every state I know of and it goes as follows:

When an agreement of the parties is reduced to writing; AND

the agreement contains an integration clause that says "what is on this contract spells out all of the terms of the agreement and the parties are only relying upon these written terms to form the agreement," AND

you are represented by counsel; AND

you are an educated person;

Under that scenario you cannot argue (as a matter of law) "yea, I know what was in the contract but I was relying upon what you told me BEFORE the contract was presented to me." RRod's contract did have an integration or merger clause.

Moreover, you cannot contradict the written terms of a contract by saying the other side told you exactly the opposite thing before you signed the contract, especially when the contract specifically states that the written document itself is all that there is. If you could, written contracts would be worthless.

It may appear I have my Scarlet covered glasses on when I say this is an absolutely idiotic legal argument for RR or his attorneys to even make. Perhaps he just wants to put up a defense so that he can bargain but he cannot win on this argument. Period.

RE: More RR whining about WVU (egami)

Thu, 15 May 2008 08:41:19 GMT

ORIGINAL: Philc

I'm not a lawyer but if somebody told me they expected to get something not specified in a contract I'd tell them that they're a moron.

RR had a team of "advisers" to help him navigate through this process he should blame them or himself.

The more pressure they put on him to sign without the adjustments he wanted the more he should have been suspicious.

Used care salesman all over the midwest salivate at the thought of meeting RR. A little pressure and he'll cave...

While I agree with that mentality from a defensive, personal perspective there is still some significant weight merited in the court of law based on verbal commitments. How relevant that will be in a court of law in this instance remains to be seen, but having worked in a business environment where were had to accomplish a lot of high dollar project work based on "word of mouth" commitments that superceded the scope of the contractual project...I can see where RR may have a much stronger case than people are anticipating.

RE: More RR whining about WVU (Philc)

Thu, 15 May 2008 08:24:17 GMT

http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/football/index.ssf/2008/05/rodriguez_gives_his_side_of_bu.html

Flaherty also wanted to know if there was a plan for Michigan, or someone acting on the school's behalf, to pay the $4 million. He asked the coach several questions related to topic, but Rodriguez's lawyer, Marvin Robon, instructed his client not to answer.

I sure want to know the answer to that one.

RE: More RR whining about WVU (UMWingedHelmet)

Wed, 14 May 2008 19:07:49 GMT

ORIGINAL: MichiganFanInOhio

I'm of the opionion that there is a lot more to this than is being let on. Otherwise, why wouldn't Rodriguez just let the Michigan Boosters pay the buyout and move on? Obviously, Rodriguez is a very prideful man and he feels that WVU isn't entitled to all of the buyout because they didn't fulfill many of the obligations that were promissed to Coach Rodriguez and his staff. I really don't see what is so wrong about Coach Rodriguez fighting for what he believes to be the truth?!

I mean, what's the worst case scenario? The courts find in favor of WVU and Coach Rodriguez is forced to pay the 4 million dollar buyout. While I don't believe that Rodriguez will get off scot free, I do believe it is worth fighting having to pay the entire 4 million dollars when you feel you've been wronged as is obviously the case here.

I totally agree but I think it will reach a point where UM must say to RR that this is affecting the football season and it is TIME to put this issue behind us one way or another. I'm still a large fan of RR and until proven otherwise, I think he is a very moral guy who stands on his principles.

RE: More RR whining about WVU (Philc)

Wed, 14 May 2008 13:08:45 GMT

I'm not a lawyer but if somebody told me they expected to get something not specified in a contract I'd tell them that they're a moron.

RR had a team of "advisers" to help him navigate through this process he should blame them or himself.

The more pressure they put on him to sign without the adjustments he wanted the more he should have been suspicious.

Used care salesman all over the midwest salivate at the thought of meeting RR. A little pressure and he'll cave...