The Register Citizen (Torrington, CT)
JEFF JACOBS
For Ollie, UConn’s ‘just cause’ turning ugly
Kevin Ollie has accused UConn of violating his constitutional rights.
The headlines were powerful. The words were powerful. Seeing that those words and headlines were generated by ESPN on Wednesday, they were especially formidable.
Ollie didn’t win nearly enough games on the basketball court the past two seasons, but he is winning on one front right now.
He is winning the public relations war nationally.
Ollie’s constitutional rights violated? Eyeballs pop. Emotions rise.
In an April 3 letter to UConn President Susan Herbst, Ollie’s lawyers accused UConn of denying Ollie due process in initiating its move to terminate the coach for “just cause” and avoid paying him the more than $10 million remaining on his contract.
Ollie’s lawyers contend that according to the school’s collective bargaining agreement, except for “serious misconduct” Ollie could only be fired as the final step of a progressive disciplinary system where each instance of misconduct is judged on its own on factual merits. With the NCAA not yet completing its investigation into UConn’s claims of serious noncompliance and with Dan Hurley being hired on March 22, the lawyers assert this is proof the school intended to fire Ollie regardless of whether there was “just cause.”
Therefore Ollie’s 14th Amendment rights were violated. Yet here’s the first amendment to lawyers going public with their side: They could be wrong.
Every legal team has a strategy and Ollie’s camp clearly has one to first attack the process. It also appears to have a tactic. When UConn announced its intentions to begin a process to terminate Ollie on March 10, calls went out to Ollie for comment. He told reporters, including one from Hearst Connecticut Media, a statement would be coming. Only ESPN got it. Ollie said he would contest the firing and would “work vigorously to defend my honor and my integrity …”
On Wednesday came news from ESPN of the letter to Herbst. A check with UConn officials showed that four Connecticut outlets, including Hearst, requested the letter and received it through the Freedom of Information Act. ESPN got it somewhere else.
And to that, I say bully for ESPN. If Ollie’s camp wants to take its case directly to a national audience and have certain voices at ESPN back him at every turn, it is a wise PR move. Again, it doesn’t make what’s been said the full truth or total fact.
Unless he did something terrible … When a coach has more than $10 million coming to him contractually, even when he did as lousy a job as Ollie did the last two years, few want to see him walk away with nothing. And the farther you get away from the UConn ticketholders who had to pay for the stink bomb, the more affection
there is for Ollie’s plight.
After reading the letter to Herbst and seeing no fewer than 36 Freedom of Information requests from Ollie’s lawyers, I am convinced comparisons are next. There are requests for every NCAA issue at the school, major and minor, for years and years. There are requests for communication between school officials and Jim Calhoun since Sept. 1, 2012 and for rules violations self-reported by Geno Auriemma. All sorts of stuff. I can only think one intention is to find similar violations to prove Ollie is being treated differently.
And if some of this mud comes out publicly and lands in the faces of people at Gampel Pavilion? Even Geno? That isn’t Kevin Ollie’s problem anymore, is it?
So, yes, it could get a little ugly. Or it could get a lot ugly.
Anybody who argues that Ollie would have been fired for just cause if the Huskies would have been 24-8 instead of 14-18 this past season is delusional. Yet big-time college sports is a cold business. And here’s cold: For everyone who points out that UConn should be made to pay every cent for being dumb enough to sign Ollie to such a big, long-term deal, somebody else should point out Ollie was dumb enough to sign a contract with such an incredibly school-friendly clause to dismiss him with just clause.
As we have pointed out since January, Article 10, Section D of Ollie’s contract says just cause includes “a violation by the coach of any law, rule, regulation, policy, bylaw, or official interpretation of the university, the conference or the NCAA.” The school clearly has determined if it self-reports a violation it doesn’t have to wait for NCAA determination before it hands out discipline. Ollie’s representation, however, keeps addressing the CBA on this, not his contractual clause.
While Ollie’s legal team is pointing to legal precedent like Cleveland Board of Education vs. Loudermill, does anybody really believe that in today’s world of big-time college athletics Ollie would get his job back? Let’s be real. The due process Ollie is getting right now is to determine if he’s going to get his money. Common sense has to be used by any arbitrator or judge. If Ollie is getting screwed here, give him his cash.
In the letter to Herbst, Ollie’s lawyers contend that UConn had provided incomplete information along with two NCAA self-reporting forms concerning minor infractions related to Ollie and no progressive discipline was imposed. Although there has been much speculation about what UConn’s assertions are in terminating Ollie, sources indicate they were all of a compliance nature and there were more than two infractions.
The truth is we don’t know what UConn’s charges against Ollie are. It would be nice if Ollie’s camp would just give it to ESPN and allow us to make some substantive judgments. Let’s keep a mind open. We may not like what we learn.
After meeting last Thursday, when Ollie declined to orally provide information to convince athletic director David Benedict that UConn had made a mistake, Ollie had a week to respond in writing. He has. After Benedict responds, Ollie can appeal to Herbst if the decision does not go his way. From there Ollie can go to arbitrator. And from there to court to argue his constitutional rights or anything else. If the NCAA decides that UConn’s self-reporting on Ollie is erroneous, hey, he could get his money that way.
As this story evolves, as the PR war congeals, the powers in Storrs have to realize that if they fail in this there could be repercussions for them — from taxpayers in a distressed state with no interest in a coach getting $10 million not to coach to diverse voices who will scream that UConn horribly tried to bully one of its own family.
Not everybody is willing to connect the lousy job Ollie did the last few years with NCAA compliance violations and decide that Ollie doesn’t deserve his money. Even if he doesn’t. Me? I’m hoping Ollie gets a year’s salary in a negotiated settlement and slides into the rear-view mirror.