• 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!

BREACH OF CONTRACT

R

right.right.right…

Well-known member
Why didn’t Hauck quietly resign then take the Illinois job? The retirement talk was all bullsh*t. Everybody knows it. Just a weird sleazy move by Bobby.

Why wouldn’t he want UM to recoup that $250K? This leaves the program in a not so ideal situation. Really cool of him to set up his buddy who is not head coaching material with the job though.

He had this lined up before his stupid resignation/retirement/non-retirement press conference last week. Watch his presser in Champaign.

 
right.right.right… said:
Why didn’t Hauck quietly resign then take the Illinois job? The retirement talk was all bullsh*t. Everybody knows it. Just a weird sleazy move by Bobby.

Why wouldn’t he want UM to recoup that $250K? This leaves the program in a not so ideal situation. Really cool of him to set up his buddy who is not head coaching material with the job though.

He had this lined up before his stupid resignation/retirement/non-retirement press conference last week. Watch his presser in Champaign.

Click to expand...
Looks like he resigned-retired before the Ill job became open. Look at what the Ill coach and multiple posters have said and reported. He couldn’t resign to take a job that hadn’t been offered to him.

"He later said Thursday that he had not talked with Hauck until Feb. 5. He added that they talked again Feb. 6 and booked Hauck a plane ticket to Illinois on Feb. 7. Hauck said they "were talking pretty serious by Sunday (Feb. 8)."

He flew to Illinois on Monday and was announced as the hire that afternoon.

Hauck said he didn't think he was done with coaching when he left UM and added that he got "quite a few calls right away" about other coaching offers. Those included two opportunities with NFL teams for special teams or defense, Bielema said he learned from Hauck during their phone call Feb. 5.

Bielema noted he was worried Hauck took one of those jobs when he couldn't reach him Feb. 6. He added that he later learned the unanswered calls were because Hauck was out of cell phone service while fishing in Montana.

Bielema said he doesn't have his coordinators on the road recruiting any longer. Instead, he sends his recruiting coaches out."

missoulian.com

Why ex-Grizzlies head coach Bobby Hauck took Illinois defensive coordinator job

Former Grizzlies head coach Bobby Hauck and current Illinois head coach Bret Bielema talk about the former being hired as defensive coordinator.
missoulian.com missoulian.com
 
Last edited:
They had this planned at least as far back as the AFCA convention in January. It was just a matter of Bielema finding a landing spot for his young DC, Aaron Henry, who he was very close to. Bielema recruited him to Wisconsin out of high school and brought him up through the coaching ranks..

As soon Bret got him on with Notre Dame as Co-DC (Feb 1) he finalized things with Hauck and he “retired” Feb 4.

If Bielema could have moved Henry last year, Hauck would have been in Champaign in 2025. He was willing to wait on Henry and miss out on the hiring cycle for 26 because Hauck was already lined up.

Hauck slipped in that presser and brought up their discussions at the AFCA last month.
 
right.right.right… said:
Why didn’t Hauck quietly resign then take the Illinois job? The retirement talk was all bullsh*t. Everybody knows it. Just a weird sleazy move by Bobby.

Why wouldn’t he want UM to recoup that $250K? This leaves the program in a not so ideal situation. Really cool of him to set up his buddy who is not head coaching material with the job though.

He had this lined up before his stupid resignation/retirement/non-retirement press conference last week. Watch his presser in Champaign.

Click to expand...
Must really suck just complaining about everything.

"Suns up, thats bull shit."
"Why da fuck the sun go down!"

"Its too cold."
"Its too hot."

"I hate Hauck and wish he'd quit!"
"Why did Hauck quit the way did!?"
 
right.right.right… said:
They had this planned at least as far back as the AFCA convention in January. It was just a matter of Bielema finding a landing spot for his young DC, Aaron Henry, who he was very close to. Bielema recruited him to Wisconsin out of high school and brought him up through the coaching ranks..

As soon Bret got him on with Notre Dame as Co-DC (Feb 1) he finalized things with Hauck and he “retired” Feb 4.

If Bielema could have moved Henry last year, Hauck would have been in Champaign in 2025. He was willing to wait on Henry and miss out on the hiring cycle for 26 because Hauck was already lined up.

Hauck slipped in that presser and brought up their discussions at the AFCA last month.
Click to expand...
You are clueless and have zero idea what you are talking about. It is well documented that Illinois wanted to hire Chris Partridge and was waiting until after the Super Bowl to announce which is after Bobby retired.
 
DayLaw said:
It’s a breach of contract and I’ve heard UM is going after the liquidated damages (buy out) amount.
Click to expand...
It’s not a breach of contract. Hauck is allowed to retire at any point which nullifies the liquid damages section which was equal to his 2026 salary which Hauck already agreed to not receive. Illinois position became available to Hauck and he accepted after he had already retired from UM.
 
5280Griz said:
It’s not a breach of contract. Hauck is allowed to retire at any point which nullifies the liquid damages section which was equal to his 2026 salary which Hauck already agreed to not receive. Illinois position became available to Hauck and he accepted after he had already retired from UM.
Click to expand...
No…he was allowed out for “death”, “incapacity”, “retirement”. All of those terms together the intent is clear. He didn’t retire though because retire means not take another college coaching job. Looking at the contract it’s favorable that frame of legal analysis . AND UM has suffered prejudice (damages) arguably by having a competitive disadvantage with the portal opening again and coaches leaving due to this change.
 
DayLaw said:
No…he was allowed out for “death”, “incapacity”, “retirement”. All of those terms together the intent is clear. He didn’t retire though because retire means not take another college coaching job. Looking at the contract it’s favorable that frame of legal analysis . AND UM has suffered prejudice (damages) arguably by having a competitive disadvantage with the portal opening again and coaches leaving due to this change.
Click to expand...
His intent when retiring was not to immediately take another college job. The Illinois job became available to him almost a week after he retired.
 
5280Griz said:
His intent when retiring was not to immediately take another college job. The Illinois job became available to him almost a week after he retired.
Click to expand...
Why are you even arguing this? It’s clear you don’t understand contract law. It’s not his intent that matters. It matters what happened he didn’t actually retire so technically he’s not out of the contract that had a year left. He then took another job in a similar profession so the liquidated damages is available. I’ve heard UM is going for it and they should.
 
DayLaw said:
Why are you even arguing this? It’s clear you don’t understand contract law. It’s not his intent that matters. It matters what happened he didn’t actually retire so technically he’s not out of the contract that had a year left. He then took another job in a similar profession so the liquidated damages is available. I’ve heard UM is going for it and they should.
Click to expand...
He did retire for 7 days.
 
I may have to agree on the retirement part, I'm surprised that there would not be a timeframe on the amount of time that must lapse before coming out of retirement.

I mean if all you need to do is announce your retirement, why hasn't every coach that is moving on just retire to avoid the buyout?:unsure:
 
I was not a Hauck supporter at all. In fact I have not attended a single game after Stitt was let go but will this season with the new coach. It is outrageous to have an issue with him retiring and then taking a job that was offered to him and he didn’t seek out, after he had finalized retiring at UM.
 
Hauck did what he wanted to do…that’s not a crazy thing, people act in their own interests and I certainly don’t hold it against him. If I was offered an opportunity get a substantial raise and lessen my responsibilities I’d want to do that.

That being said, the university has a fiduciary responsibility to seek damages, if there’s grounds for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top