I can attest to that. The Auburn message boards were livid over the duck hunting trip. The general feeling was that we weren't even trying to recruit the same caliber talent that Saban was at the time. Auburn people still makes cracks from time to time about the duck hunting trips.
Auburn's HCs
- Thread starter Rob.Roy
- Start date
I can attest to that. The Auburn message boards were livid over the duck hunting trip. The general feeling was that we weren't even trying to recruit the same caliber talent that Saban was at the time. Auburn people still makes cracks from time to time about the duck hunting trips.
TerryP
Staff
Right after the loss to Vandy Tubs fired Franklin with the claim they were moving away from the spread offense and back to the power game. There's one head that rolled and that likely bought more time for Tubs.
That said, is it even fair to compare to the situations? It was hardly a secret Lowder and Rane both wanted Bowden gone—Lowder to the point of almost saying it in public. Then you had a guy like Oliver sitting just drooling over the thought of getting a shot at the HC job.
I suspect Tubs contract had a lot to do with it as well. He certainly got paid when he decided to step away but let's not forget that was a negotiated buyout—likely five times greater than Bowden's.
True the price was higher but what difference would it have made if they fired him in the middle of the season vs. the end if we're talking money? The amount would have still been the same.
TerryP
Staff
No, the money wouldn't have been the same. His buyout dropped from 6 million to start the 2008 season to 5.1 million at the end of the season. Firing him in the middle of the season would have likely removed any and all possibility they had to negotiate the buyout. It ended with half being paid within the first month, the other half being paid within the first year.
In other words, in the middle of the season, it would have been "fired with/without cause." At the end, it was a negotiated buyout.
You and I still seem to be circling around a point here; if they fired Bowden mid-season—a move he claims was his own (resigned)—why not fire Tubs mid-season? I still don't see how one applies to the other.
Different president at Auburn. Different Athletic Director. A HELL OF A LOT of difference in the amount of money in the coffers.
You stated that you felt Tubs contract had a lot to do with it as well and would have played a role in not releasing him before the end of the season. According to this ESPN article, it was still 6 mill at the end of 2008.
http://m.espn.go.com/ncf/story?storyId=3742934&src=desktop
"Tuberville's contract was extended through 2013 after the previous season and was worth $3.3 million annually. It also included a $6 million buyout if he was fired after this season."
I suspect that they would have still reached the same or similar settlement if they had pulled the trigger prior. We can agree to disagree there.
I'm not comparing Bowden's terms with Tubbs, but what I am arguing (since it was brought up) the money would not have been that much different midway or at the end of the season for Tubbs. AU also had the opportunity to make a complete change when they gave the go ahead to let Tuberville fire Franklin at the midway point. That seems to suggest they still had some confidence in his coaching ability. Not a lot but enough to keep his job.
As for Bowden resigning, even JGD admits Lowder forced him out.
Also not that this was any kind of gospel, but I found this a little interesting. However I contend if that had happened, he still would have been let go after the IB.
http://www.coacheshotseat.com/TommyTuberville.htm
Last edited by a moderator:
TerryP
Staff
<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention --> @zipdrive <!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
ESPN made a mistake on that one re: Tubs contract. It was 6.1 at the beginning of the season. But the buyout dropped as the season progressed leaving it at 5.1 at the end of the year.
Now, that number (5.1) was something that Goldberg reported stating "according to sources..." Assuming Goldberg was fed that number from Auburn officials isn't a stretch of the imagination. I remember that week very well due to a gig I had...if you want to google it, you'll find his update in the first week of December.
Two things I see a little differently here. One, the idea Tubs was "given the go ahead" to fire an assistant just doesn't computer considering how frequently he had changed assistants. I always have believed he had the control to do what he wished with his staff.
Two, the reason I mention timing is this; a huge difference in Auburn firing Tubs, and the way it was released when he was out as "resigned." If they decided to just fire him, it puts those negotiations on the buyout...well, let's just say I'd imagine the they would be less than cordial.
(BTW, in that link for coacheshotseat you'll find a .pdf for his contract. But, it's the wrong one. That one is from 2004 and his terms were amended with the extension in 2007.)
"Also not that this was any kind of gospel, but I found this a little interesting. However I contend if that had happened, he still would have been let go after the IB."
If he'd have reached their prognostication of 10-2 you think he'd have been let go after 2008?
ESPN made a mistake on that one re: Tubs contract. It was 6.1 at the beginning of the season. But the buyout dropped as the season progressed leaving it at 5.1 at the end of the year.
Now, that number (5.1) was something that Goldberg reported stating "according to sources..." Assuming Goldberg was fed that number from Auburn officials isn't a stretch of the imagination. I remember that week very well due to a gig I had...if you want to google it, you'll find his update in the first week of December.
Two things I see a little differently here. One, the idea Tubs was "given the go ahead" to fire an assistant just doesn't computer considering how frequently he had changed assistants. I always have believed he had the control to do what he wished with his staff.
Two, the reason I mention timing is this; a huge difference in Auburn firing Tubs, and the way it was released when he was out as "resigned." If they decided to just fire him, it puts those negotiations on the buyout...well, let's just say I'd imagine the they would be less than cordial.
(BTW, in that link for coacheshotseat you'll find a .pdf for his contract. But, it's the wrong one. That one is from 2004 and his terms were amended with the extension in 2007.)
"Also not that this was any kind of gospel, but I found this a little interesting. However I contend if that had happened, he still would have been let go after the IB."
If he'd have reached their prognostication of 10-2 you think he'd have been let go after 2008?
You guys are so "Aubsessed" :icon_lol:
[MENTION=12209]TerryP[/MENTION]
Actually I did not notice or pay attention to a pdf link in that article from hot seat. That really was not why I was posting it anyway. It was more of a humorous article than being presented as fact.
Concerning the ESPN article, that was dated 12/3/2008 (now on desktop site it says updated the next day on the 4th but still same verbiage), can you tell me which article you are referring too that was a rebuttal? You're gonna find I'm a bit of a pain in the ass too.
Besides I don't see any reason for them to go to court over the 900K, its almost like buying several months in advance to find a successor if they would have to pay it.
To answer your question, considering the volatile history with Lowder, I do not think he would have been there next year. But that's just my opinion.
[MENTION=17619]bamaraider[/MENTION]
Auburn fan base by in large chooses to stay in the dark most of the time and only assume Alabama is the offending party in all matters both on and off the field. I have to demonstrate that this is not the case. I would think you would understand?
Actually I did not notice or pay attention to a pdf link in that article from hot seat. That really was not why I was posting it anyway. It was more of a humorous article than being presented as fact.
Concerning the ESPN article, that was dated 12/3/2008 (now on desktop site it says updated the next day on the 4th but still same verbiage), can you tell me which article you are referring too that was a rebuttal? You're gonna find I'm a bit of a pain in the ass too.
Besides I don't see any reason for them to go to court over the 900K, its almost like buying several months in advance to find a successor if they would have to pay it.
To answer your question, considering the volatile history with Lowder, I do not think he would have been there next year. But that's just my opinion.
[MENTION=17619]bamaraider[/MENTION]
Auburn fan base by in large chooses to stay in the dark most of the time and only assume Alabama is the offending party in all matters both on and off the field. I have to demonstrate that this is not the case. I would think you would understand?
TerryP
Staff
<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention --> @zipdrive <!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
The original article was written by Goldberg...beat writer for one of the N. Alabama papers. I'd hoped you would look for it and I wouldn't have to! :bluebiggrin:
But, since you've placed the burden on my shoulders...
Here's two different articles on the numbers. One, from ESPN and the other from AL.com
ESPN: Tiger to pay Tuberville despite quitting...
I'm citing this one first because I want to point out the last word of this, "Agreed." Maybe I'm making too much of this, but does that sound like a negotiation/agreement on terms that Jacobs was happy about. Or, does it give you that impression of a smart-assed, flippant type of attitude? I certainly am led to think it was far from cordial and that's at the end of the season.
OK, I'm straying off the subject...
AL.com: Tuberville's buyout is only 5.1 million.
Tommy Tuberville's lovely parting gift is a little smaller than we thought.
Tuberville's yearly buyout was prorated each month, so the $6 million buyout we knew of when the year started is actually $5.1 million today. That's what he'll receive from Auburn University after the football coach resigned Wednesday, according to someone familiar with the contract.
I'm straying off the subject slightly here but I wanted to share a thought I've had for years; hell, decades.
I've found it interesting that both schools deal with influences on the coaching position. While Auburn has had to deal with guys like Lowder, Alabama hasn't been immune. The difference between the two is one comes from the BOT, the other comes from people within the school's administration. (IE: Finus Gaston with Franchione.)
Is one better or worse than the other? There's a subject of debate. Both certainly get in the way and both are certainly putting their noses in areas better off left alone.
The original article was written by Goldberg...beat writer for one of the N. Alabama papers. I'd hoped you would look for it and I wouldn't have to! :bluebiggrin:
But, since you've placed the burden on my shoulders...
Here's two different articles on the numbers. One, from ESPN and the other from AL.com
ESPN: Tiger to pay Tuberville despite quitting...
When Tommy Tuberville resigned, Auburn athletic director Jay Jacobs agreed to pay the $5.08 million buyout even though the football coach quit.
In the two-paragraph resignation letter dated Dec. 3, Tuberville wrote:
"This letter will confirm our recent conversations about my status as Head Football Coach. After long consideration, I have decided to resign. I understand that, notwithstanding my resignation, the University will make a total payment of $5,083,334 as outlined in Section 21 of my contract. I also understand that the structure and timing of the payments may be modified by mutual agreement.
I deeply appreciate the opportunity to serve as Head Coach at Auburn and will continue to support Auburn's Athletic Program in any way I can."
Jacobs wrote a one-word response: "Agreed."
"This letter will confirm our recent conversations about my status as Head Football Coach. After long consideration, I have decided to resign. I understand that, notwithstanding my resignation, the University will make a total payment of $5,083,334 as outlined in Section 21 of my contract. I also understand that the structure and timing of the payments may be modified by mutual agreement.
I deeply appreciate the opportunity to serve as Head Coach at Auburn and will continue to support Auburn's Athletic Program in any way I can."
Jacobs wrote a one-word response: "Agreed."
I'm citing this one first because I want to point out the last word of this, "Agreed." Maybe I'm making too much of this, but does that sound like a negotiation/agreement on terms that Jacobs was happy about. Or, does it give you that impression of a smart-assed, flippant type of attitude? I certainly am led to think it was far from cordial and that's at the end of the season.
OK, I'm straying off the subject...
AL.com: Tuberville's buyout is only 5.1 million.
Tommy Tuberville's lovely parting gift is a little smaller than we thought.
Tuberville's yearly buyout was prorated each month, so the $6 million buyout we knew of when the year started is actually $5.1 million today. That's what he'll receive from Auburn University after the football coach resigned Wednesday, according to someone familiar with the contract.
I'm straying off the subject slightly here but I wanted to share a thought I've had for years; hell, decades.
I've found it interesting that both schools deal with influences on the coaching position. While Auburn has had to deal with guys like Lowder, Alabama hasn't been immune. The difference between the two is one comes from the BOT, the other comes from people within the school's administration. (IE: Finus Gaston with Franchione.)
Is one better or worse than the other? There's a subject of debate. Both certainly get in the way and both are certainly putting their noses in areas better off left alone.
<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->@TerryP<!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
Actually I did not notice or pay attention to a pdf link in that article from hot seat. That really was not why I was posting it anyway. It was more of a humorous article than being presented as fact.
Concerning the ESPN article, that was dated 12/3/2008 (now on desktop site it says updated the next day on the 4th but still same verbiage), can you tell me which article you are referring too that was a rebuttal? You're gonna find I'm a bit of a pain in the ass too.
Besides I don't see any reason for them to go to court over the 900K, its almost like buying several months in advance to find a successor if they would have to pay it.
To answer your question, considering the volatile history with Lowder, I do not think he would have been there next year. But that's just my opinion.
<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->@bamaraider<!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->
Auburn fan base by in large chooses to stay in the dark most of the time and only assume Alabama is the offending party in all matters both on and off the field. I have to demonstrate that this is not the case. I would think you would understand?
Just messing with you man:icon_thumright:
[MENTION=12209]TerryP[/MENTION]
Thanks for the articles. I found it little funny his mother said he was fired but that's a moot point I guess.
Yes, I highly doubt it was cordial.
Sure we definitely had our share of noses in the program. It seemed to get better as Mal's tenure progressed in the AD role. I don't know what goes on behind the scenes but it appeared too.
But let me ask you this, is it fair to move in a different direction (so to speak) after a coach suffers one bad year? Would letting Saban go or ask for a resignation after a 500 or less season be justified after 1 time?
Thanks for the articles. I found it little funny his mother said he was fired but that's a moot point I guess.
Yes, I highly doubt it was cordial.
Sure we definitely had our share of noses in the program. It seemed to get better as Mal's tenure progressed in the AD role. I don't know what goes on behind the scenes but it appeared too.
But let me ask you this, is it fair to move in a different direction (so to speak) after a coach suffers one bad year? Would letting Saban go or ask for a resignation after a 500 or less season be justified after 1 time?
Not trying to beat a dead horse here, but even if AU was forced to pay the additional 900k, they are not a poor school. Its no secret that the heads and Tuberville disliked each other. If they removed him mid season (season was already a scratch anyway) , is an extra 2-3 months worth it to find a successor for the additional buyout?
They disliked him personally but they knew he could coach and it still was the first bad year he had since being at Auburn after his first year. He had one 7-5 in bt but 8 or better until 08.
They disliked him personally but they knew he could coach and it still was the first bad year he had since being at Auburn after his first year. He had one 7-5 in bt but 8 or better until 08.
