Mizzou's Mike Anderson "seriously considering" Oregon job

[tornado]

whoa...for $3-4 million per year, who wouldn't??

http://ow.ly/1zn9I

[Future Walk-On]

This would make my year.

[KillerB]

interesting read from post dispatch columnist

Mizzou coach Mike Anderson makes a puzzling move
Bernie Miklasz
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Saturday, Apr. 17 2010
I'm surprised to learn that Missouri's Mike Anderson is apparently interested
in listening to a pitch from Oregon, which is searching for a new basketball
coach.

Contractually, Anderson is doing nothing wrong by talking to Oregon. He has an
escape clause in his Missouri contract. But at some point, shouldn't principle
count for something?

When Georgia courted Anderson a year ago, Missouri responded aggressively by
increasing his annual compensation to $1.55 million a year, guaranteed.
Anderson happily signed a seven-year extension. Then he coached the Tigers to a
second consecutive NCAA Tournament appearance. Then he landed one of top 10 or
15 recruiting classes in the nation. And these kids committed to Mizzou because
they assumed Anderson would be their coach.

I'd be surprised if Anderson left. Sure, Oregon has lots Nike dollars to throw
at him. But Anderson, at best, would be Oregon's fourth or fifth choice for the
job. Doesn't that mean something to him?

When Anderson recruited Tony Mitchell, Phil Pressey, Ricky Kreklow, Matt
Pressey and Ricardo Ratliffe, I'm guessing Anderson mentioned his long-term
contract at Missouri to assure the kids he'd be there. Anderson just received
the commitments from Ratliffe and M. Pressey earlier this week. Did Anderson
let the newest Tigers know that he might be flirting with Oregon?

Again: I'm not debating contract law here. Missouri granted him permission to
speak with Oregon, and Anderson has the right to listen to the Ducks. But that
doesn't mean it's ethically correct to do so.

Not when you have Laurence Bowers, Kim English, Marcus Denmon and Michael Dixon
returning for what could be a special 2010-2011 season. Not when you've
recruited other, excited players to be part of what you're building in
Columbia. And not when you're only one year into a seven-year deal put together
in good faith by a Missouri administration that wanted the coach to feel
important and appreciated.

Why would Anderson even entertain the possibility of running out on his players
when his program is on the brink of something special? Is this Anderson's
attempt to enhance his contract at Missouri for a second consecutive year?

If so, here's what the Mizzou administration should do:

Nothing.

That's right. For once I'd like to see a university stand up to a wandering
coach and tell him to hit the road. No new contract, no renegotiating, no
enhancements. The MU system isn't exactly rolling in cash in these tough
economic times. And the Missouri administration shouldn't feel pressured to
reward Anderson a second time in the last 12 months.

This is a corrupt system. NCAA basketball and football coaches hop from job to
job and treat contracts as if they're written on bathroom tissue. And when the
coaches take the money and run, they leave the kids behind to deal with the
consequences. Because of NCAA rules, players aren't free to leave unless
they're willing to sit out a year.

I hope Anderson stays. I think he will stay. I really don't believe he's a
mercenary opportunist.

And if Anderson goes to Oregon? Well, then I've misjudged him. Anderson
wouldn't be the man I thought he was.

[Future Walk-On]

Mizzou coach Mike Anderson makes a puzzling move
Bernie Miklasz
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Saturday, Apr. 17 2010
I'm surprised to learn that Missouri's Mike Anderson is apparently interested
in listening to a pitch from Oregon, which is searching for a new basketball
coach.

Contractually, Anderson is doing nothing wrong by talking to Oregon. He has an
escape clause in his Missouri contract. But at some point, shouldn't principle
count for something?

When Georgia courted Anderson a year ago, Missouri responded aggressively by
increasing his annual compensation to $1.55 million a year, guaranteed.
Anderson happily signed a seven-year extension. Then he coached the Tigers to a
second consecutive NCAA Tournament appearance. Then he landed one of top 10 or
15 recruiting classes in the nation. And these kids committed to Mizzou because
they assumed Anderson would be their coach.

I'd be surprised if Anderson left. Sure, Oregon has lots Nike dollars to throw
at him. But Anderson, at best, would be Oregon's fourth or fifth choice for the
job. Doesn't that mean something to him?

When Anderson recruited Tony Mitchell, Phil Pressey, Ricky Kreklow, Matt
Pressey and Ricardo Ratliffe, I'm guessing Anderson mentioned his long-term
contract at Missouri to assure the kids he'd be there. Anderson just received
the commitments from Ratliffe and M. Pressey earlier this week. Did Anderson
let the newest Tigers know that he might be flirting with Oregon?

Again: I'm not debating contract law here. Missouri granted him permission to
speak with Oregon, and Anderson has the right to listen to the Ducks. But that
doesn't mean it's ethically correct to do so.

Not when you have Laurence Bowers, Kim English, Marcus Denmon and Michael Dixon
returning for what could be a special 2010-2011 season. Not when you've
recruited other, excited players to be part of what you're building in
Columbia. And not when you're only one year into a seven-year deal put together
in good faith by a Missouri administration that wanted the coach to feel
important and appreciated.

Why would Anderson even entertain the possibility of running out on his players
when his program is on the brink of something special? Is this Anderson's
attempt to enhance his contract at Missouri for a second consecutive year?

If so, here's what the Mizzou administration should do:

Nothing.

That's right. For once I'd like to see a university stand up to a wandering
coach and tell him to hit the road. No new contract, no renegotiating, no
enhancements. The MU system isn't exactly rolling in cash in these tough
economic times. And the Missouri administration shouldn't feel pressured to
reward Anderson a second time in the last 12 months.

This is a corrupt system. NCAA basketball and football coaches hop from job to
job and treat contracts as if they're written on bathroom tissue. And when the
coaches take the money and run, they leave the kids behind to deal with the
consequences. Because of NCAA rules, players aren't free to leave unless
they're willing to sit out a year.

I hope Anderson stays. I think he will stay. I really don't believe he's a
mercenary opportunist.

And if Anderson goes to Oregon? Well, then I've misjudged him. Anderson
wouldn't be the man I thought he was.

Totally agree with everything you say...but I still hope he goes to Oregon.

I am from Champaign...my good friend is from Columbia.....we have a heated, argumentative debate over Illinois Mizzou basketball every day.

[tornado]

Maybe, but if the man has made a success of himself and his current employer then why call his principles into play when he looks to secure the best long term future for himself and his family?

Guys like Calipari, Alford, Tubby, Roy Williams, Bill Self, Matt Painter, Ben Howland, Lorenzo Romar, etc., etc...
all left their respective schools to go where they felt it was best (and each got a nice payday in the process!), and I don't recall Bernie Miklasz invoking principles and hinting ot their greed......

Is there anyone that would doubt for a second that Benrnie Miklasz would quit his job instantly at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and move to Oregon, if the newspaper there offered him $3 million per year?
So talk principles all you want, Bernie, but let the man have the same honor you'd ask and demand for yourself...the right to determine his own future ad pick for himself from the offers he has.....

[KillerB]

Is that really what the point of the article is about T?

I think its a comdemnation of the current system.. where coaches make promises to players and then bolt when it is convenient for them.. and that university allow themselves to be held up for more money.
I believe Bernie says Anderson is well within his rights to talk to Oregon.

But let's not argue this is a "too look out for his family deal". The guy is not making $30K a year and needs to move on so his family can put bread on the table. This is a guy already making $1.5 Mil/season. Yes $3 Mil a year is much better. But at some point in college basketball (and football) the coaches need to start living up to their committments to the players they recuit (Come to this school and you & I will build something special.. I'll be here for you for your entire college career etc). It's not like Anderson is in a bad situation. He's in a great spot. I'm not downplaying the importance of money.
But when coaches spout all this garbage about family, committment and dedication.. shouldn't they be expected to live up to what they are preaching?

[Future Walk-On]

I think if coaches want to switch schools...they should have to sit out a year.

[SFP]

I'm with T on this one. The guy has a job and has the right to chose what is best for him and his family. If for some reason he starts losing at Mizzou they would fire him in a heart beat. The kids he leaves behind will learn a lesson and in reality will they be harmed that much? They will play in a pretty good conference, probably for a pretty good coach regardless and at worst ask for their release and who knows who will come calling. If I was him, I'd be on the first plane heading to beautiful Oregon and taking that $3 million. The middle of Missouri or Oregon with $1.5 million more. That sounds like a no brainer to me but what do I know.

[KillerB]

Coaches are supposed to be teachers. You hear it in every sport.. he taught me so much about life off the court (field) as well as on. What is the lesson here. Take the money and run? Committment means nothing?

Don't get me wrong.. if the money is that important to Anderson he should go. I would hope that is not the only factor in his decision. I'd like to think he's a little deeper than that.

And don't give me the "poor" coach gets fired when he doesn't win. First they usually get paid the remainder or a significant portion of the remaining contract. And if I don't do my job well.. I get fired too (without a payoff).

But again I think you missed the point of the article. It's not that Anderson is doing anything techically or legally wrong. It's tht the system if broken and the NCAA & Universities allow if not encourage coaches to jump ship whenever they want.. or to come back to the school and blackmail more money out of the universities.

Name me another industry where you sign a contract.. and can jump whenever you want? If you sign a deal in my industry you are locked in. You might get fired.. but you are not going anywhere else unless they let you.

[SFP]

The non compete clauses are not legal or inforsable in various states and thank god in live in one.

A coaches job is to his family first just like it is any working man, period. It's not like these kids in Mizzou will be left without a team, dorm, food and an education. Why all this moral grounding for a game? He should write an article about American kids getting killed and maimed 1/2 way around the world. Where's the outrage there? KillerB you have the right to leave your industry and go to one where your contracts can be broken just like these coaches. I see executives moving from one competitor to the next in my industry, then again rarely does an employee have a long-term contract and at best maybe some sort of payout if let go. I know I always negotiate some type of parachute for these exact circumstances. There is never any security in jobs and it should work both ways. I like to think I can fire my company.

[KillerB]

The non compete clauses are not legal or inforsable in various states and thank god in live in one.

A coaches job is to his family first just like it is any working man, period. It's not like these kids in Mizzou will be left without a team, dorm, food and an education. Why all this moral grounding for a game? He should write an article about American kids getting killed and maimed 1/2 way around the world. Where's the outrage there? KillerB you have the right to leave your industry and go to one where your contracts can be broken just like these coaches. I see executives moving from one competitor to the next in my industry, then again rarely does an employee have a long-term contract and at best maybe some sort of payout if let go. I know I always negotiate some type of parachute for these exact circumstances. There is never any security in jobs and it should work both ways. I like to think I can fire my company.

You are seriously arguing "I have the right to change careers to one that does not require the enforcement of contracts?" That's a really compelling arguement. The point is contracts are enforced in most other industries.


Let's see what else. You see executives in your industry moving form job to job.. but they don't have long term contracts. So how is this a fair comparison. The point is the coaches want the longterm contracts.. then don't honor them. I'll bet my bottom dollar if your company gave an executive a longterm deal and the guy bolted to a competitor there would be lawyers involved. You have to compare apples to apples.


And yes.. a sports columnist should be writing his opinion about the war. Come on.. get real! He's a sports columnist.. he writes about sports.

[Da Coach]

I would guess that most coaches have such an "escape clause" in their contracts, like Anderson has, that allow them to seek a high level job.

In industry, such "escape clauses" rarely exist, and in fact, the "non-compete" restrictive covenant clauses are prevalent.

[AZ BU Fan]

"Seriously Considering" = waiting for Oregon to increase their offer, or, waiting for Mizzou to trump Oregon's offer!

[bball24]

he turned down oregon per espn tonight

[Future Walk-On]

Son of a *****

EDIT: The B word isn't asterisked out...FYI