Northwestern Fires Pat Fitzgerald

Donate To GopherHole
Goldmember said:
They probably nuked the football program completely for at least a generation over, by their own admission,“no evidence”.
Click to expand...
Eeeehhh I duno.

They were maybe better off under Pat compared to what we might expect from them ... but they're constantly in rebuilding mode / waffling between ok and horrible anyway.

They might do worse now, but either way that program's leadership has been / will have to do a lot of "rebuilding" to get them anywhere.
 

hungan1 said:
It will be a tough rebound for NW post-Fitz.

Fitz didn't want to play the NIL game. With the high admission standards, good luck to NW, and other similar programs. They have to adapt to the changes.

Stanford seems to have no problem in the recruiting department.

PJ Fleck was very proactive, and even a pioneer in some cases during the pandemic.
Click to expand...
It's not really his call anyway, or any coach's call on that. Either someone from the outside steps up and pays ... or not.
 


hungan1 said:
NW has big boosters who picked up the tab for the new athletic facilities. NIL is chum change.
Click to expand...
They can pay now if they want ... that's their call, not Pat's call.

If NW's "big boosters" haven't done much for NIL now... hard to imagine they really want to ...
 
Last edited:

Goldmember said:
They probably nuked the football program completely for at least a generation over, by their own admission,“no evidence”.
Click to expand...
upnorthkid said:
Nuked in what way? They’ve been over .500 9 times in Fitz 17 seasons and 11 times since 2000. From 1980 to 2000 they were over .500 twice. Their football program has always been bad. It’s not going to magically get worse and will entirely depend on who they hire next. Players still came to penn state post paterno, players will still come to NW. it’s still a good school and in the big ten
Click to expand...
Whomever is hired long term, NW's success will hinge largely on how they do with the Transfer Portal both in retaining talent and gaining it. Just like virtually every P5 program, but no doubt more challenging given their academic standards.

Michael Wilbon (Northwestern Alum, Season Ticket Holder & Trustee) indicated on PTI that there are attractive HC candidates that have already called him to get a gage on the opportunity.
 


PMWinSTP said:
If that were the case, you think only the full amount?
Click to expand...
They had the right to fire him at any time by paying the full buyout
They publicly haven’t said much about him.

I don’t really see why he could be owed anything other than his negotiated contract. For all we know, they are planning on paying him the buyout and aren’t even firing “for cause”
 

Some guy said:
They had the right to fire him at any time by paying the full buyout
They publicly haven’t said much about him.

I don’t really see why he could be owed anything other than his negotiated contract. For all we know, they are planning on paying him the buyout and aren’t even firing “for cause”
Click to expand...
I mean, they already fired him for cause. I just wonder if there would be other money to go after beyond the contract value.
 

PMWinSTP said:
I mean, they already fired him for cause. I just wonder if there would be other money to go after beyond the contract value.
Click to expand...
From what I’ve read the buyout in the contract was about 40 million or a little over.
I don’t think there is any way he gets above that 40some million. Don’t know why he would.

I would guess he gets somewhere between 0 and the 40some million when they finally settle with each other (he may even get all 40some million)
 

Some guy said:
From what I’ve read the buyout in the contract was about 40 million or a little over.
I don’t think there is any way he gets above that 40some million. Don’t know why he would.

I would guess he gets somewhere between 0 and the 40some million when they finally settle with each other
Click to expand...
It is a weird situation... I feel like a buyout was not even the radar so I wonder how that is landing with the Board of Trustees now. Time will tell.
 



PMWinSTP said:
It is a weird situation... I feel like a buyout was not even the radar so I wonder how that is landing with the Board of Trustees now. Time will tell.
Click to expand...
It’s also strange because it’s a private school. So contract isn’t really known


Trying to logically think about it I would guess Pat Fitz wants the whole thing and the university will want to pay none of it. And I’m guessing it’s not perfectly clean so it probably falls somewhere in the middle. If it’s 42, they might both settle on 15-30 range just so it goes away. Publicity is bad for both parties. I also think there is a pretty good chance we never actually hear how much money is exchanged anyways.
 

Some guy said:
It’s also strange because it’s a private school. So contract isn’t really known


Trying to logically think about it I would guess Pat Fitz wants the whole thing and the university will want to pay none of it. And I’m guessing it’s not perfectly clean so it probably falls somewhere in the middle. If it’s 42, they might both settle on 15-30 range just so it goes away. Publicity is bad for both parties. I also think there is a pretty good chance we never actually hear how much money is exchanged anyways.
Click to expand...
I think about if they really can't prove it. They didn't fire him initially after a lengthy outside investigation. Maybe it is as straight forward as negotiating to an agreeable amount. Another poster said it's a really only a breach of contract case.
 

PMWinSTP said:
I think about if they really can't prove it. They didn't fire him initially after a lengthy outside investigation. Maybe it is as straight forward as negotiating to an agreeable amount. Another poster said it's a really only a breach of contract case.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the two week suspension really plays into it very much. They said two weeks, then thought about it more and decided something else.
People get placed on paid and unpaid leave all the time and then the consequence is changed later.

The bigger deal on how much is going to be paid is what is in his contract specifically in regards to hazing/oversight/safe environment/etc and what they can prove occurred with or without his knowledge.
 




Some guy said:
They had the right to fire him at any time by paying the full buyout
They publicly haven’t said much about him.

I don’t really see why he could be owed anything other than his negotiated contract. For all we know, they are planning on paying him the buyout and aren’t even firing “for cause”
Click to expand...
PMWinSTP said:
I mean, they already fired him for cause. I just wonder if there would be other money to go after beyond the contract value.
Click to expand...
Some guy said:
From what I’ve read the buyout in the contract was about 40 million or a little over.
I don’t think there is any way he gets above that 40some million. Don’t know why he would.

I would guess he gets somewhere between 0 and the 40some million when they finally settle with each other (he may even get all 40some million)
Click to expand...
PMWinSTP said:
It is a weird situation... I feel like a buyout was not even the radar so I wonder how that is landing with the Board of Trustees now. Time will tell.
Click to expand...
Some guy said:
It’s also strange because it’s a private school. So contract isn’t really known


Trying to logically think about it I would guess Pat Fitz wants the whole thing and the university will want to pay none of it. And I’m guessing it’s not perfectly clean so it probably falls somewhere in the middle. If it’s 42, they might both settle on 15-30 range just so it goes away. Publicity is bad for both parties. I also think there is a pretty good chance we never actually hear how much money is exchanged anyways.
Click to expand...
PMWinSTP said:
I think about if they really can't prove it. They didn't fire him initially after a lengthy outside investigation. Maybe it is as straight forward as negotiating to an agreeable amount. Another poster said it's a really only a breach of contract case.
Click to expand...
Some guy said:
I don’t think the two week suspension really plays into it very much. They said two weeks, then thought about it more and decided something else.
People get placed on paid and unpaid leave all the time and then the consequence is changed later.

The bigger deal on how much is going to be paid is what is in his contract specifically in regards to hazing/oversight/safe environment/etc and what they can prove occurred with or without his knowledge.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone has reported that the buyout was $40M, at least not that I have seen and we don't have the contract. What I have seen is that figure listed as an estimate of what was left on the contract. The buyout could be that much, but it could also be far less. You don't get damages for breach of contract beyond the contract terms in a case like this. There could be other causes of action, for example defamation, but I am not aware of anything that would support such a claim so far. In fact, the University has said there was no proof that Fitz knew about the problematic behavior and they are only firing him because they think he should have known as the head coach. That's more a matter of opinion and whether the termination is found to be with or without cause may turn on that issue, but it is not likely actionable as defamation.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Sigh. Again, you are overstating what is known. I’ve heard commentary up to and including the 11 players corroborated what the QB Richardson said (Fitz orchestrated hazing). A narrative exists that may be truthful, or wildly exaggerated. This morning I listened to the Pair and a Spare podcast while walking the dogs and the host (not the shouter but the wierd sidekick) said the same.

So once again, nobody knows if this was a regular, organized activity on a weekly, semiannual, annual basis or a one-off event. We don’t know if Richardson is just making his version up. The hazing described by the others hasn’t been defined - what did that entail? Sexual grab ass stuff, making freshmen sing, making freshmen do this or that or the other thing.

Unless I am misremembering the report only stated some players said undefined hazing occurred/was corroborated, not what Richardson said (leadership led hazing) was true. If it was an isolated incident here or there I can conceive of scenarios where news of it didn’t make it up the chain.

And yes, I do believe some of you are wound up. Sorry.
Click to expand...
Sigh. Again you aren't reading what I am saying you are just assuming you know. Here let me break it down for you since you can't see past your arguments with others:

I am not speaking about the specificity of the hazing. I am speaking to the fact that there was a lack of oversight. This is easily provable, and if you just think about it you will see what I am saying. The problem we all have is we don't know what is the truth and what is not when it comes to what went down. Maybe the players were hazed, maybe they weren't. You have legit reasons to doubt it, others have legit reasons to believe it. The missing information is leaving us to our own devices...

If Fitz had put someone in a position to watch over the players (i.e. oversight) that gap in information would not exist. We would know if the players did what was alleged they had done and we would know if steps were taken to stop it. In that case we would also know if nothing went on because Fitz or whoever the person was would be out in front right now telling the world Fitz got railroaded and it is all lies and BS with evidence to back it up.

That is where Fitz put himself in a bad position. Lack of oversight is the death knell of coaches because as soon as something goes public there is not enough information for people to know who to support and the coach has no answers because he isn't in a position to have any. It makes coaches look bad and like the inmates are running the asylum.

Northwestern handled every aspect of this wrong, but the problem is there is no real way they can defend Fitz because Fitz has no way to defend himself. Just the basic amount of oversight of the team and he doesn't even get the original 2 week suspension.
 

MNVCGUY said:
If you fire the whole staff right now who runs the team? There is a reason why you don't see coaching changes typically during this time of year....too close to the season.

Maybe they end up hiring some out of work head coach. But I don't know how that person assembles the staff they want this close to the start of the season. Maybe a few more assistants get let go once the coach is hired but have to think they at least keep a portion of the old staff in place for the 2023 season before cleaning house after it ends.
Click to expand...

This is not a normal situation. It makes sense in a normal offseason not to hire a new staff this late because it will screw the season. In this case, the season is screwed anyways and honestly you need to change the narrative around the team and fast.

Yes you would hire an out of work coach most likely...and he would be behind the 8 ball looking for a staff but if you are the admin at Northwestern would you rather that dominate the headlines about your school (in which case people will tune out since no one cares about NW Football) or do you want Pat Fitzgerald to be the headline all offseason?

NW needs to mitigate the damage (much of which they caused) and hiring Pat's assistant for one season isn't going to do that...
 


2nd Degree Gopher said:
I don't think anyone has reported that the buyout was $40M, at least not that I have seen and we don't have the contract. What I have seen is that figure listed as an estimate of what was left on the contract. The buyout could be that much, but it could also be far less. You don't get damages for breach of contract beyond the contract terms in a case like this. There could be other causes of action, for example defamation, but I am not aware of anything that would support such a claim so far. In fact, the University has said there was no proof that Fitz knew about the problematic behavior and they are only firing him because they think he should have known as the head coach. That's more a matter of opinion and whether the termination is found to be with or without cause may turn on that issue, but it is not likely actionable as defamation.
Click to expand...
Correct. No one knows the exact numbers. I implied 40 million because he had a public number up around 40 million. He is 19th highest paid in the country and the Average known buyout of the top 20 is like 52 million. I don’t remember where I read that. It could be less if not all the years are guaranteed.

A defamation case would be a separate case. It would be hard for Fitzgerald to say they defamed him when they haven’t really said anything negative about him. I agree
 

PMWinSTP said:
If that were the case, you think only the full amount?
Click to expand...

I would guess the amount he would win would be catastrophic to the athletic department budget.

edit: at least if he can prove they terminated him wrongfully.
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
You don't get damages for breach of contract beyond the contract terms in a case like this. There could be other causes of action, for example defamation, but I am not aware of anything that would support such a claim so far.
Click to expand...
I agree with this, but Fitz’ lawyer has alluded to damages in this NBC Sports article. It might be more aimed at ensuring future NW communications don’t actually defame him.

Webb contends the termination for cause violated Fitzgerald’s contract, and that the initial two-week unpaid suspension was the product of a negotiated agreement between Northwestern and Fitzgerald.

Webb claims that nothing new came to light between Northwestern’s receipt of the report conducted by a third-party law firm and the termination decision…

“They’ve breached two contracts and damaged his reputation severely in the way this has occurred,” Webb said.

The reference to Fitzgerald’s reputation suggests that other claims could be made, such as defamation.
Click to expand...
@Some guy I agree with you that the President could have cause to fire Fitz, decide to suspend him, and then change his mind to fire him later. I am guessing the “negotiated agreement” piece is pretty important to this, especially since that language appears in many of the articles. Depending on how it went down though (discussions vs. emails vs. signed agreement), it might be hard to prove.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
They can pay now if they want ... that's their call, not Pat's call.

If NW's "big boosters" haven't done much for NIL now... hard to imagine they really want to ...
Click to expand...
It seems hard to believe the Ryans would have put that much money into the facilities and weren't kicking any $ to NIL. But all the NIL $ in the world aren't likely to get an unqualified player into NU (or Stanford, or Vandy, or Rice etc.)
 


Dave H said:
NW needs to mitigate the damage (much of which they caused) and hiring Pat's assistant for one season isn't going to do that...
Click to expand...
I've agreed with a lot of your posts in this thread - just wanted to point out that the assistant was hired after the season, and after the investigation started, so he wasn't around when this happened. He was at NDSU for like the past 4 years, so it's *almost* like an outside hire, and the players wanted him.

Just pointing that out, so it doesn't seem like someone who's been with Fitz for a while is now running things.
 

Dave H said:
Sigh. Again you aren't reading what I am saying you are just assuming you know. Here let me break it down for you since you can't see past your arguments with others:

I am not speaking about the specificity of the hazing. I am speaking to the fact that there was a lack of oversight. This is easily provable, and if you just think about it you will see what I am saying. The problem we all have is we don't know what is the truth and what is not when it comes to what went down. Maybe the players were hazed, maybe they weren't. You have legit reasons to doubt it, others have legit reasons to believe it. The missing information is leaving us to our own devices...

If Fitz had put someone in a position to watch over the players (i.e. oversight) that gap in information would not exist. We would know if the players did what was alleged they had done and we would know if steps were taken to stop it. In that case we would also know if nothing went on because Fitz or whoever the person was would be out in front right now telling the world Fitz got railroaded and it is all lies and BS with evidence to back it up.

That is where Fitz put himself in a bad position. Lack of oversight is the death knell of coaches because as soon as something goes public there is not enough information for people to know who to support and the coach has no answers because he isn't in a position to have any. It makes coaches look bad and like the inmates are running the asylum.

Northwestern handled every aspect of this wrong, but the problem is there is no real way they can defend Fitz because Fitz has no way to defend himself. Just the basic amount of oversight of the team and he doesn't even get the original 2 week suspension.
Click to expand...

Step 1 of thinking about this is determining if what alleged happened indisputably happened. We don’t know, so saying there wasn’t oversight to observe something that may not have happened or happened on a few instances not necessarily observed by staff isn’t the same as a systemic level of regular ritual hazing organized, supported, or looked past by the staff up to and including Fitzgerald.

You're skipping step 1 and going straight to step 2. A report containing unverified allegations (which we still don’t know the nature of except for Mr. Richardson’s version) is not necessarily proof that would hold up under scrutiny and questioning. Fitz may be guilty as sin, a sociopath with a toothy grin, but I’m not willing to say that without some pretty solid, reliable witnesses, evidence of complaints, staff communications, and so on.

Similarly I won’t throw Fleck under the bus for what Norton and some others have said.
 

hungan1 said:
NW has big boosters who picked up the tab for the new athletic facilities. NIL is chum change.
Click to expand...

Boosters that fund facilities or scholarships get their name on buildings, plaques, press announcements that exist for perpetuity. Recognition of their status and pompous ego v. their peers motivates the ultra wealthy (see Sanford for one example). I’m not sure NIL $ scratches that itch quite the same way, for some? Maybe if it buys special access to the coaches, locker rooms, input on recruiting and the donor is a diehard fan bent on building a contender like John Ruiz.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Boosters that fund facilities or scholarships get their name on buildings, plaques, press announcements that exist for perpetuity. Recognition of their status and pompous ego v. their peers motivates the ultra wealthy (see Sanford for one example). I’m not sure NIL $ scratches that itch quite the same way, for some? Maybe if it buys special access to the coaches, locker rooms, input on recruiting and the donor is a diehard fan bent on building a contender like John Ruiz.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure there are significant tax advantages to donating large sums to colleges too.
 

disco said:
It seems hard to believe the Ryans would have put that much money into the facilities and weren't kicking any $ to NIL. But all the NIL $ in the world aren't likely to get an unqualified player into NU (or Stanford, or Vandy, or Rice etc.)
Click to expand...
At the same time their recruiting doesn’t seem to show it…
 

matt said:
I agree with this, but Fitz’ lawyer has alluded to damages in this NBC Sports article. It might be more aimed at ensuring future NW communications don’t actually defame him.


@Some guy I agree with you that the President could have cause to fire Fitz, decide to suspend him, and then change his mind to fire him later. I am guessing the “negotiated agreement” piece is pretty important to this, especially since that language appears in many of the articles. Depending on how it went down though (discussions vs. emails vs. signed agreement), it might be hard to prove.
Click to expand...
If in the negotiated agreement Fitzgerald admits fault, his acceptance of a two week suspension could actually hurt him
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom