Not even close to semantics. Firing means he lost his job effective immediately. Not being renewed means he finishes out his contract and then moves on. They are not remotely close to the same thing and the difference between the 2 is not semantics. How Joel felt or what he wanted has no bearing on the situation. This line of argument might be worth having if his non-renewal was a surprise instead of the decision that everyone had know was coming for months.
I can't answer these for you. Ask Kaler because he obviously disagrees with you. I'll venture one guess, which is that they have ID'd a specific area (athletic or otherwise) for him to fundraise on where they feel his involvement is important. As I've noted before, a brand new Prez with no ties to Joel has no need to do him a favor and offer him a "golden parachute." Not when his departure is expected and thus will ruffle few feathers internally. He clearly believes that JM will raise more money than they pay him. You disagree which is fine.
It has? Evidenced by what? Press release posturing? You could be right, but thus far the only major athletics related bill to go to the Legislature (beer sales) came out looking the way the U wanted. Time will tell.
