OT - Oregon State fires womens basketball coach

[Mark Padgett]

And they're going to pay off her contract at $1.2 million. They're firing her "without cause". Heck, they could fire me for half that amount.

Oregon State will pay LaVonda Wagner $1.2 million after firing her 'without cause' | OregonLive.com

[grunewar]

"She went 68-85 in five seasons in Corvallis, including 26-64 in Pacific-10 Conference play, and led her teams to two berths in the Women's National Invitation Tournament."

It's win or you're out, we all know that!

[whistleone]

Seems to me that if the allegations mentioned here (Oregon State coach LaVonda Wagner built culture on fear and intimidation, sources say | OregonLive.com) are true, OSU would have plenty of cause to fire the coach.

[Mark Padgett]

"Without cause" is a legal term based on the conditions of her contract. If the school claimed they had "cause" to fire her, then the school would risk being taken to court to prove she had violated the specific terms of her contract. This conceivably could cost tons of money in court costs, etc. By firing her "without cause", they choose to just pay her off and be done with it.

Notice this is Oregon State University, not the University of Oregon. If it was the U of O, they'd probably just get Phil Knight to pay her off out of petty cash.

BTW - one of my grandsons who is 12 is a huge Beavers fan, but even he has said their womens basketball program "sucks".

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by grunewar

"She went 68-85 in five seasons in Corvallis, including 26-64 in Pacific-10 Conference play, and led her teams to two berths in the Women's National Invitation Tournament."

It's win or you're out, we all know that!

How does a team make the NIT TWICE while winning only 26 total conference games? The NIT has a rule (at least on the men's side) that a team must be .500 to be eligible. Granted that .500 mark is overall (I think), but for the sake of argument consider this. The PAC-10 plays 18 conference games each season, so that would mean that nine wins are necessary in each of the two seasons that the team made that tournament. That leaves only eight conference wins total for the other three seasons. So going 3-15 or 2-16 a couple of times is going to get a coach fired.

As for paying out the final season of the contract in full, that is the school's fault. These institutions structure these deals in this manner in order to attract the individual they desire to coach their program. They enter the agreement perfectly happy. If it doesn't work out, they should have to honor the deal they made. They could just as easily have written the contract to state "we can fire you at any time we wish without paying you a dime" had they wanted.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by nevadaref

how does a team make the nit twice while winning only 26 total conference games? The nit has a rule (at least on the men's side) that a team must be .500 to be eligible. Granted that .500 mark is overall (i think), but for the sake of argument consider this. The pac-10 plays 18 conference games each season, so that would mean that nine wins are necessary in each of the two seasons that the team made that tournament. That leaves only eight conference wins total for the other three seasons. So going 3-15 or 2-16 a couple of times is going to get a coach fired.

As for paying out the final season of the contract in full, that is the school's fault. These institutions structure these deals in this manner in order to attract the individual they desire to coach their program. They enter the agreement perfectly happy. If it doesn't work out, they should have to honor the deal they made. They could just as easily have written the contract to state "we can fire you at any time we wish without paying you a dime" had they wanted.

+1

[Pantherdreams]

Fire people and not pay them whenever we want . . . what are we? The NFL or the real world . . . I don't think she could hack it either place.

[A Pennsylvania Coach]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

How does a team make the NIT TWICE while winning only 26 total conference games? The NIT has a rule (at least on the men's side) that a team must be .500 to be eligible. Granted that .500 mark is overall (I think), but for the sake of argument consider this. The PAC-10 plays 18 conference games each season, so that would mean that nine wins are necessary in each of the two seasons that the team made that tournament. That leaves only eight conference wins total for the other three seasons. So going 3-15 or 2-16 a couple of times is going to get a coach fired.

Not sure if this is serious but if it is, well, I won't ever have you do my taxes. The OP says "She went 68-85 in five seasons in Corvallis, including 26-64 in Pacific-10 Conference play", so she went 42-21 in non-conference play. Not sure why you think she would have to be 9-9 in conference play to make it to .500 overall when on average she was about 8-4 in non-conference games each year.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by A Pennsylvania Coach

Not sure if this is serious but if it is, well, I won't ever have you do my taxes. The OP says "She went 68-85 in five seasons in Corvallis, including 26-64 in Pacific-10 Conference play", so she went 42-21 in non-conference play. Not sure why you think she would have to be 9-9 in conference play to make it to .500 overall when on average she was about 8-4 in non-conference games each year.

You might want to re-read his post. He wasn't saying what you think.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Granted that .500 mark is overall (I think), but for the sake of argument consider this. The PAC-10 plays 18 conference games each season, so that would mean that nine wins are necessary in each of the two seasons that the team made that tournament. That leaves only eight conference wins total for the other three seasons. So going 3-15 or 2-16 a couple of times is going to get a coach fired.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

How does a team make the NIT TWICE while winning only 26 total conference games? The NIT has a rule (at least on the men's side) that a team must be .500 to be eligible. Granted that .500 mark is overall (I think), but for the sake of argument consider this. The PAC-10 plays 18 conference games each season, so that would mean that nine wins are necessary in each of the two seasons that the team made that tournament. That leaves only eight conference wins total for the other three seasons. So going 3-15 or 2-16 a couple of times is going to get a coach fired.

Sure would. Poor Todd Lickliter won 15 conference games over three years and that got him fired.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by A Pennsylvania Coach

Not sure if this is serious but if it is, well, I won't ever have you do my taxes. The OP says "She went 68-85 in five seasons in Corvallis, including 26-64 in Pacific-10 Conference play", so she went 42-21 in non-conference play. Not sure why you think she would have to be 9-9 in conference play to make it to .500 overall when on average she was about 8-4 in non-conference games each year.

Many of those non-conference games could have been against non-D1 teams, and thus wouldn't count as tournament qualifying wins. Determining that would take looking up the team's schedule for each year, and I don't care to bother.

However all of that is not the point. I have a hard time accepting that a team which can't even go .500 in its own conference should be eligible for postseason play.

[Mark Padgett]

I had a letter to the editor published in today's Oregonian newspaper. One of their sports columnists had a comment about the expansion of the Pac-10 conference in his column on Tuesday. He wondered what the Oregon conference members could do with the additional $20,000,000 they might get from that expansion. I said it was simple. They could fire more coaches "without cause".