Get Rid of Engstrom!

[PlayerRep]

Why would he consult with Foley?

You're asking why he wouldn't consult his Senior VP. Foley's role is to be involved with matters like this.

"James P. Foley, University Executive Vice President

As the University Executive Vice President at the University of Montana Jim plays an integral role in the planning and implementation of programs to ensure the fulfillment of the University's institutional Mission. Specifically, Jim is responsible for the administrative oversight of the public relations operations of the University and takes the lead role in communicating the intricacies and essential position of higher education in the vitality of the state."

Here's the listing of the job in the UM administration. Office of Executive Vice President looks pretty important to me. Besides legal counsel, who would you consult on a matter like this?

Office of the President

President's Home Page

Office of the Provost

Provost's Home Page
Office of Academic Affairs

Executive Offices

Office of Executive Vice President
Office of Admin & Finance
Office of Information Technology
Office of Research & Development
Office of Student Affairs
Office of University Legal Counsel
UM Foundation

 

[stubbins]

Oh, and PR, now might be a good time to just stay silent, and start corroborating your stories with your access points that are still at UM. The NCAA just might be coming to town, and may have already started asking questions. :shock:

Gawd you're an annoying fuck....

 

[PlayerRep]

Oh, and PR, now might be a good time to just stay silent, and start corroborating your stories with your access points that are still at UM. The NCAA just might be coming to town, and may have already started asking questions. :shock:

Ha-ha, real funny. You are a joke.

 

[NorthwestFresh]

Oh, and PR, now might be a good time to just stay silent, and start corroborating your stories with your access points that are still at UM. The NCAA just might be coming to town, and may have already started asking questions. :shock:

Ha-ha, real funny. You are a joke.

You're the joke, PR. Might want to tell your buddy Foley to start updating the resume...

 

[NorthwestFresh]

Oh, and PR, now might be a good time to just stay silent, and start corroborating your stories with your access points that are still at UM. The NCAA just might be coming to town, and may have already started asking questions. :shock:

Gawd you're an annoying f***....

The truth is often annoying, especially when it's the last thing you want to hear.

 

[GrizRanger]

75....harsh comments from someone not having all of the facts. Engstrom made a decision, more than likely, with the approval of his management. Let's see how this plays out as more details are revealed over the next few months. In the meantime, we beat state once again and make the play-offs. Business as usual....

Engstrom didn't consult or even inform his senior vice president who sits in the office next to him. He didn't discuss the situation with O'Day or Pflu. Who do you consider Engstrom's "management" to be?

I would think Engstrom's managers would be the Montana Board of Regents, http://mus.edu/board/BORmembers.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Anyway that is who I intend to express my dissatisfaction with President Engstrom to. This President has to go for the good of UM. He needs to leave much more so than Pflugrad and O'Day.

 

[stubbins]

Oh, and PR, now might be a good time to just stay silent, and start corroborating your stories with your access points that are still at UM. The NCAA just might be coming to town, and may have already started asking questions. :shock:

Gawd you're an annoying f***....

The truth is often annoying, especially when it's the last thing you want to hear.

yes, the last thing I want to hear is your beef with PR.....I could give two shits if what you say is true or not...it's just annoying as hell.

 

[tnt]

Player....Engstrom's management or superiors are the individuals he is responsible to for his decisions. I don't believe that he made the decision without consulting with them.

He didn't consult his vp Jim Foley. Seems like a glaring omission to me.

For such a smart guy, you consistently miss the obvious.

It seems obvious to me. I also would have thought a couple of retirements (campus security and Deans office) would have given the Athletic office a clue too. But then the Boosters rarely have a clue either. They haven't quite figured out that as far as influence they are the ugly step children, The real influence come from folks with much larger checkbooks with access the old rah rah boys will never have.

 

[grizindabox]

Not knowing all of the facts I will reserve judgement on Mr. Engstrom. I am however, just like all of the rest of the Griz Nation left scratching my head about how this was done.

Currently I do not have a problem with how it was done, and not sure why people do.

I know you out of state folks don't hear all the local Missoula media news. A couple of the tv and print media have stated that O Day and Pflugrad had clauses in their contracts that required notice if they were to be fired. From what I hear they had no notice.

To me that screams lawsuits. Since I am still a tax paying Montanan, that concerns me. No matter how you cut it, a bungled firing by Engstrom will cost me money.

Not a problem for you. Great. Some of the rest of us don't see anything but lawyers in our future, not so great.

They did have notice. Their contracts run through the end of June, meaning they have 3 months notice. They will be paid their entire contract, they are just out of a job beginning July 1.

 

[mondayamqb]

1. It appears that the (why) people were asking about is being answered. The past couple of years the local media has covered the disappointing misadventures of too many of our football players.
2. AD O'Day and Coach Pflu were totally committed to UM. It can be debated whether they did or were doing enough to change a culture that has existed--without the current publicity--for decades. Were their firings fair? Arguably not. Life is not fair. Will there be financial ramifications? Count on it.
3. Pres. Engstrom is a good man. He likes both Jim and Robin. He, and others who have the obligation to protect the image and reputation of the institution, for past and future students, parents, alumni, legislators, and friends made a difficult decision . Could it have been handled differently? God, yes.
But that was orchestrated by legal. Don't kill the messenger. He didn't do this by himself but didn't hide behind anyone and is taking all the heat.
4. Whenever something happens we don't like, we need to blame some One. Or some Thing. Overlooked seems to be the fact that every reported incident involved alcohol use by both the alleged violators and victims. This isn't a football, student, Missoulian, young/old/rich/poor problem. It's what we've become as a society.
4.I'm not innocent. Or a Bible thumper. Accuser or defender. Just an observer who is a very sad
Griz fan. Three good men, who each in their own way, was dedicated to sincerely wanting to help each of these young men in the football program--who are now going to have to exhibit exceptional personal discipline and common sense--to maintain and grow the strong tradition that is Griz Nation. Blame the real culprit. Booze. Go Griz.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Not knowing all of the facts I will reserve judgement on Mr. Engstrom. I am however, just like all of the rest of the Griz Nation left scratching my head about how this was done.

Currently I do not have a problem with how it was done, and not sure why people do.

I know you out of state folks don't hear all the local Missoula media news. A couple of the tv and print media have stated that O Day and Pflugrad had clauses in their contracts that required notice if they were to be fired. From what I hear they had no notice.

To me that screams lawsuits. Since I am still a tax paying Montanan, that concerns me. No matter how you cut it, a bungled firing by Engstrom will cost me money.

Not a problem for you. Great. Some of the rest of us don't see anything but lawyers in our future, not so great.

They did have notice. Their contracts run through the end of June, meaning they have 3 months notice. They will be paid their entire contract, they are just out of a job beginning July 1.

Precisely.

 

[PlayerRep]

Not knowing all of the facts I will reserve judgement on Mr. Engstrom. I am however, just like all of the rest of the Griz Nation left scratching my head about how this was done.

Currently I do not have a problem with how it was done, and not sure why people do.

I know you out of state folks don't hear all the local Missoula media news. A couple of the tv and print media have stated that O Day and Pflugrad had clauses in their contracts that required notice if they were to be fired. From what I hear they had no notice.

To me that screams lawsuits. Since I am still a tax paying Montanan, that concerns me. No matter how you cut it, a bungled firing by Engstrom will cost me money.

Not a problem for you. Great. Some of the rest of us don't see anything but lawyers in our future, not so great.

They did have notice. Their contracts run through the end of June, meaning they have 3 months notice. They will be paid their entire contract, they are just out of a job beginning July 1.

The assistant coaches' contracts run until February. I believe Hauck the cycle of the contracts changed. Are you sure about the date of Pflu's contract? Some state contracts, including Kramer's had a no-cause provision, i.e. that he could be fired without cause. I assume Pflu and O'Day may have those provisions in their contracts. There's an interesting new MT Supreme Court case that I think interprets firing someone under a contract without cause takes the contract out the employment contract exception to the Montana employment act. If the exception isn't applicable, then the employee can only be fired for cause, along with some other non-applicable things. If this is the case, then a wrongful termination action becomes a distinct possibility. I believe MT law requires the reason for the termination to be provided, if requested by the employee, if the situation is covered by the MT employment act (i.e. the employment contract exception isn't applicable). These guys have been terminated. It is not accurate to say their employment contracts are not being renewed. If the contract wasn't being renewed, then Pflu would still be the coach. Any MT employment person or lawyer out there, should feel free to correct or supplement.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Currently I do not have a problem with how it was done, and not sure why people do.

I know you out of state folks don't hear all the local Missoula media news. A couple of the tv and print media have stated that O Day and Pflugrad had clauses in their contracts that required notice if they were to be fired. From what I hear they had no notice.

To me that screams lawsuits. Since I am still a tax paying Montanan, that concerns me. No matter how you cut it, a bungled firing by Engstrom will cost me money.

Not a problem for you. Great. Some of the rest of us don't see anything but lawyers in our future, not so great.

They did have notice. Their contracts run through the end of June, meaning they have 3 months notice. They will be paid their entire contract, they are just out of a job beginning July 1.

The assistant coaches' contracts run until February. I believe Hauck the cycle of the contracts changed. Are you sure about the date of Pflu's contract? Some state contracts, including Kramer's had a no-cause provision, i.e. that he could be fired without cause. I assume Pflu and O'Day may have those provisions in their contracts. There's an interesting new MT Supreme Court case that I think interprets firing someone under a contract without cause takes the contract out the employment contract exception to the Montana employment act. If the exception isn't applicable, then the employee can only be fired for cause, along with some other non-applicable things. If this is the case, then a wrongful termination action becomes a distinct possibility. I believe MT law requires the reason for the termination to be provided, if requested by the employee, if the situation is covered by the MT employment act (i.e. the employment contract exception isn't applicable). These guys have been terminated. It is not accurate to say their employment contracts are not being renewed. If the contract wasn't being renewed, then Pflu would still be the coach. Any MT employment person or lawyer out there, should feel free to correct or supplement.

Wasn't "their contracts aren't being renewed" the EXACT language Engstrom used in his 3 sentence press release?

 

[grizindabox]

Wasn't "their contracts aren't being renewed" the EXACT language Engstrom used in his 3 sentence press release?

That is exactly what he said.

 

[AZGrizFan]

It is not accurate to say their employment contracts are not being renewed. If the contract wasn't being renewed, then Pflu would still be the coach. Any MT employment person or lawyer out there, should feel free to correct or supplement.

a) Those were the exact words used by Engstrom
b) I thought it was odd that both O'Day and Pflu were allowed to stay around for at least a couple hours and address staff, football players, etc. That's not something I think would normally happen in a true "firing"
c) If you KNOW you're not renewing someone's contract, wouldn't you want to move on immediately?

Engstrom needed to get those guys out of the program without actually "firing" them. Fortunately for him from a timing standpoint, their contracts were coming up and he had an easy way out with only a couple months of "severance" pay required.

 

[first11]

MR. Royce has even more on his agenda, so far only banning alchohol from few selected campus events, but eliminating it from tailgating is not far down the road....

 

[AZGrizFan]

MR. Royce has even more on his agenda, so far only banning alchohol from few selected campus events, but eliminating it from tailgating is not far down the road....

THAT would be killing the goose that lays the golden egg. I don't think he's that stupid.

 

[goatcreekgriz]

If an employment contract for a specific term allows for termination without cause, then the Brown case provides that the employment relationship is not exempt from the wrongful discharge from employment act. That's because it is not truly for a specific term. However, termination for 'good cause" as defined by the act is a defense, and no one here should speculate as to whether "good cause" under the statute may or may not exist. As to an explanation for termination, by statute an employee is entitled to a statement of reasons upon demand. There can be little doubt that such demand has been made and the statement of reasons will be a public document. But the statute is pretty toothless about the ramifications of an incomplete or vague statement of reasons, and the statement can be amended. Finally, the person charged with terminating the employee should consult with his/her superiors and legal counsel, but there are many good reasons not to discuss it with subordinates. The failure to discuss the decision with a subordinate was probably by design and may in fact demontstrate leadership. Obviously, Dr. Engstrom is accountable for his decisions, and his actions should be scrutinized. There is much about all of this that we will never know, or should never know. Based on the way this is playing out, I do not believe it was a hasty decision.

 

[snap]

1. It appears that the (why) people were asking about is being answered. The past couple of years the local media has covered the disappointing misadventures of too many of our football players.
2. AD O'Day and Coach Pflu were totally committed to UM. It can be debated whether they did or were doing enough to change a culture that has existed--without the current publicity--for decades. Were their firings fair? Arguably not. Life is not fair. Will there be financial ramifications? Count on it.
3. Pres. Engstrom is a good man. He likes both Jim and Robin. He, and others who have the obligation to protect the image and reputation of the institution, for past and future students, parents, alumni, legislators, and friends made a difficult decision . Could it have been handled differently? God, yes.
But that was orchestrated by legal. Don't kill the messenger. He didn't do this by himself but didn't hide behind anyone and is taking all the heat.
4. Whenever something happens we don't like, we need to blame some One. Or some Thing. Overlooked seems to be the fact that every reported incident involved alcohol use by both the alleged violators and victims. This isn't a football, student, Missoulian, young/old/rich/poor problem. It's what we've become as a society.
4.I'm not innocent. Or a Bible thumper. Accuser or defender. Just an observer who is a very sad
Griz fan. Three good men, who each in their own way, was dedicated to sincerely wanting to help each of these young men in the football program--who are now going to have to exhibit exceptional personal discipline and common sense--to maintain and grow the strong tradition that is Griz Nation. Blame the real culprit. Booze. Go Griz.

Pretty decent take on the situation.

 

[first11]

MR. Royce has even more on his agenda, so far only banning alchohol from few selected campus events, but eliminating it from tailgating is not far down the road....

THAT would be killing the goose that lays the golden egg. I don't think he's that stupid.

Royces finishing school opening soon! (formerly known as the University of Montana)