Are any of you employERS? If you were, you'd understand Jerry's position on Dan.

[AbeBeta]

That was idiotic on Jerry's part. It is insulting to Reeves. He treated a Cowboy great and a very knowledgeable resource like you would a paid intern.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

I understand it ...... but I would not treat Dan Reeves like that.


I do not think Jerry ever really wanted him here ...... he does not lose people he really wants to keep.

This man speaks the truth and this comment is "signature" worthy.

Jerry Jones stated on Galloway and Company that "Wade Phillips" called Dan Reeves and asked him to be a member of the staff. Jerry Jones probably came to the negotiating table with alot of doubts and probably made it very difficult for both sides to find common ground.

Also, even though NFL Consulting is highly unique, generally speaking, all of the organizations I have worked for, those organizations never specified in the contract how many "hours" a consultant had work. All that was expected was that the job was getting done.

 

[zeromaster]

Interesting. So Jones didn't think this was important enough to mention it to Reeves when approaching him about the position, but did think it important enough to add it to the contract and make it the deal-breaker.

I hope we see some of this same accountability in the event of any pratfalls this upcoming season. The past comments about the unimportance of team chemistry and the need for continuity in the light of some of this past season's performance certainly throws a strange light on this.

People can change, but generally it's only in the face of threatening circumstances (jail, illness, etc). What will be the motivator here?

 

[Alexander]

I do not think Jerry ever really wanted him here

There you go.

If he did, I am sure he would not have insisted on the clause.

 

[Alexander]

That was idiotic on Jerry's part. It is insulting to Reeves. He treated a Cowboy great and a very knowledgeable resource like you would a paid intern.

We already know that he has very little built-in respect for the old Cowboy greats.

We also know that this wasn't something he would have done on his own without Phillips' urging.

He simply wasn't willing to make this one concession. Reeves is right, it is trivial and we are laughing that it was a deal breaker.

 

[AbeBeta]

There you go.

If he did, I am sure he would not have insisted on the clause.

I don't know if I buy that entirely. Jerry doesn't strike me as the kind of owner who is going to play games like that. He has his flaws but I think most folks would rate him as a "straight shooter"

 

[Kangaroo]

Look contracts very from business to business contract to contract and job to job

I seen both contracts where ir specified hours and ones that did not in the IT industry it depends on what is negotiated and the type of work it was.

I seen Helpdesk contracts very from company to company where it gone by hours and we also done contracts per seat no hours specified.

Also different industries sometimes have different practices when it comes to contracts and sometimes varies even with all that

 

[BulletBob]

I am sorry, but you are all coming at this from the perspective of a fan rather than a business owner.

As a business owner you NEVER hire a consultant without specifying EXACTLY what you will get from that consultant in the contract. And those of you moaning about having to punch a timeclock, I've got news for you: consultants hand in timesheets every week - that's how they get paid!

On rare occassions you may issue a fixed-price contract under which the consultant delivers a particular product (like a sofware application) and the consultant agrees to a single fixed price regradless of the amount of hours he puts in.

But in this case, there is no possible way to stipultate a fixed-price product. All you are left with is the time that the consultant will dedicate.

Those of you indicating that there are "special" situations in business where you throw out contractual obligations and do business on a handshake just because of the "respect" the other party has earned, simply do not understand the risk involved in proceeding down that path.

I've seen too many situations where two parties enter into a business arrangement with the best of intentions and mutual respect. More than 50% of the time those arrangements end in bitter disputes involving legal fees and a fundamental misunderstanding of what each party's obligation was in the engagement.

The fan in me is as angry as the rest of you that Jerry let Dan walk away from the organization. The businessman in me however, understands that you simply do not do business with someone who carries a ton of respect, but won't agree to any time commitments on a contract.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

I am sorry, but you are all coming at this from the perspective of a fan rather than a business owner.

As a business owner you NEVER hire a consultant without specifying EXACTLY what you will get from that consultant in the contract. And those of you moaning about having to punch a timeclock, I've got news for you: consultants hand in timesheets every week - that's how they get paid!

On rare occassions you may issue a fixed-price contract under which the consultant delivers a particular product (like a sofware application) and the consultant agrees to a single fixed price regradless of the amount of hours he puts in.

But in this case, there is no possible way to stipultate a fixed-price product. All you are left with is the time that the consultant will dedicate.

Those of you indicating that there are "special" situations in business where you throw out contractual obligations and do business on a handshake just because of the "respect" the other party has earned, simply do not understand the risk involved in proceeding down that path.

I've seen too many situations where two parties enter into a business arrangement with the best of intentions and mutual respect. More than 50% of the time those arrangements end in bitter disputes involving legal fees and a fundamental misunderstanding of what each party's obligation was in the engagement.

The fan in me is as angry as the rest of you that Jerry let Dan walk away from the organization. The businessman in me however, understands that you simply do not do business with someone who carries a ton of respect, but won't agree to any time commitments on a contract.

True.

However, "hours" isn't something that is always specified in the contract.

In this situation, Jerry Jones has to use "qualitative" data to determine Dan Reeves' work performance.

It is completely asinine to let something as trivial as "minimum number of hours" derail a deal, if Jerry Jones truely wanted Dan Reeves here.

At my place of employment, I work Consultants quite a bit and the amount of hours they are suppose to work is not in their contract.

 

[wileedog]

I am sorry, but you are all coming at this from the perspective of a fan rather than a business owner..

I may be making assumptions BB, but I don't think you hire people with an available talent pool limited to the dozens or so, or talk to many consultants that have resumes only a handful of people in the world have achieved.

You are thinking like a mid-sized business owner. Egos and scarcity of talent at this level make this a completely different scenario than what you are talking about.

4 times superbowl coaches don't need to punch a clock.

Irrelevant anyway, as has been said if Jerry wanted him here he would be here. Unless you honestly think Jerry Jones is truly worried that Dan Reeves of all people is going to rip him off, in which case we have bigger problems.

 

[Alexander]

I don't know if I buy that entirely. Jerry doesn't strike me as the kind of owner who is going to play games like that. He has his flaws but I think most folks would rate him as a "straight shooter"

I don't think a "straight shooter" has an individual work for three days and slides a contract across the desk with topics that were never discussed to that level before.

Here's the contract, and, oh by the way, I am going to have to insist that you hit the Dave Campo Memorial timeclock each day. Thanks.

 

[adbutcher]

For one moment, look at this thing from a pure business perspective. I know it is difficult, and I know that Jerry has made some incredibly unproductive decisions over his tenure.

But this Dan Reeves thing? Come on.

I own a consulting firm. I have been in the consulting business for over 15 years. You do NOT EVER write/sign a contract with a consultant without specifying how many hours that consultant is going to work for you. It is simply not done.

Think about it. Would you lay out MILLIONS of dollars of your own money for a consultant without ANY guarantee that the consultant would be onsite working for a minimum amount of hours per week?

It has nothing to do with "punching a time clock." It has to do with contractually making sure you get what you pay for.

Think about a scenario in which you are applying for a new job. You do well in the interview, and the salary negotiations start. The negotiations end with you making the following assertion, "Sure, $1.5 million a year should cover it, but one last thing - I can't sign up to this 40-hours-a-week-thing. In fact, I'm not willing to guarantee that I'll be in the office for any number of hours a week. I need a flexible schedule. But trust me, you'll get tremendous value for the salary you pay me." How do you think that interview would end?

Dan may have promised up and down that he would get the job done. That's great, but from a contract perspective you have got to back it up. You've got to commit to a certain number of hours in order to get paid.

You can vent all you want about stupid decisions from Jerry which are killing this team, but in this case, Jerry was not the one being unreasonable. Any business would be committing suicide by signing contracts with consultants that contain no hours clauses.

By the way, if any of you would like to sign a contract :write:for one of my consultants where you pay us a certain amount per year, and we do not have to guarantee how many hours we will put in on the project, please PM me. I'd be ecstatic to accommodate your request.

:wink2:

 

[Alexander]

I am sorry, but you are all coming at this from the perspective of a fan rather than a business owner.

Is Bob McNair a business owner? From Reeves' reaction it doesn't sound like he was punching in and out each day for him.

I wonder if Bob Kraft has Floyd Reese on a time clock too. If not someone better warn him about the perils of taking a professional at his word.

 

[Chief]

Dan said he hated the term "consultant" and was going to have a coaching role. He wasn't just going to call in from Georgia a couple hours a week and then go cash Jerry's checks.

I can't imagine anyone would think Dan Reeves would do that, and I have no doubt Jerry never did. He just sabotaged this thing because he didn't really want him here.

Bingo.

That's the word for it.

It was Wade's idea and Jerry wasn't comfortable having a strong, opinionated football guy that close, so Jerry adds some language to the contract that questions Reeves' integrity, knowing Reeves would balk, and just like that, Jerry got rid of him.

 

[wileedog]

Bingo.

That's the word for it.

It was Wade's idea and Jerry wasn't comfortable having a strong, opinionated football guy that close, so Jerry adds some language to the contract that questions Reeves' integrity, knowing Reeves would balk, and just like that, Jerry got rid of him.

Nothing else makes sense. I don't think anyone here doubts Jerry would drop a clause like that in a heartbeat if he really wanted him here. Unless he honestly believes that friggin Dan Reeves is going to mail it in just to cash a paycheck?

 

[Deep_South]

Guess it would be pretty hard for Reeves to gain a lot of respect from the people at Valley Ranch if he was the only one required to be there all of the time.

 

[cowboyjoe]

I think the main issue here is trust, simple and to the point.

if you listen to jerry jones, he talks about trust, and how he and bill parcells differed on the 53 man roster, but they worked through that with trust.

to me, im hearing some how, some way, in the talks, the trust issue came up, so jerry thinking whatever he did, tried to protect himself with the time clock thing.

now, i am also thinking this, and i posted about this in earlier posts about wade phillips. Remember, where i commented on a fact that a buffalo fan said, wade phillips would say while wade was head coach for the buffalo bills. Wade would say, im going to lunch for an hour. But good ole wade wouldnt come back that afternoon. What is Jerry Jones finally woke up to that, what wade was doing, and maybe some other coaches not pulling their weight because wade left for the day.

So, Jerry Jones is covering himself like businessmen do in contracts.

what is this is part of that issue, something that good ole wade has done last year. Remember, how many times did good ole wade give players an extra day off? So, when wade gave those players an extra day off, wouldnt it make sense, because the players arent there, then the head coach wouldnt have as much work to do either.

so, what if jerry jones is trying to cover himself on this issue?

 

[Alexander]

I think the main issue here is trust, simple and to the point.

if you listen to jerry jones, he talks about trust, and how he and bill parcells differed on the 53 man roster, but they worked through that with trust.

to me, im hearing some how, some way, in the talks, the trust issue came up, so jerry thinking whatever he did, tried to protect himself with the time clock thing.

now, i am also thinking this, and i posted about this in earlier posts about wade phillips. Remember, where i commented on a fact that a buffalo fan said, wade phillips would say while wade was head coach for the buffalo bills. Wade would say, im going to lunch for an hour. But good ole wade wouldnt come back that afternoon. What is Jerry Jones finally woke up to that, what wade was doing, and maybe some other coaches not pulling their weight because wade left for the day.

So, Jerry Jones is covering himself like businessmen do in contracts.

what is this is part of that issue, something that good ole wade has done last year. Remember, how many times did good ole wade give players an extra day off? So, when wade gave those players an extra day off, wouldnt it make sense, because the players arent there, then the head coach wouldnt have as much work to do either.

so, what if jerry jones is trying to cover himself on this issue?

I don't know about Jerry Jones, but if I had a team in disarray with a head coach who wasn't pulling his considerable weight and took long lunches, I'd simply fire him, not appoint a consultant to help him and then insist on tracking their time.

Again, I wonder if other owners like Bob Kraft are covering themselves against this considerable issue of time theft.

 

[wileedog]

I think the main issue here is trust, simple and to the point.

if you listen to jerry jones, he talks about trust, and how he and bill parcells differed on the 53 man roster, but they worked through that with trust.

to me, im hearing some how, some way, in the talks, the trust issue came up, so jerry thinking whatever he did, tried to protect himself with the time clock thing.

now, i am also thinking this, and i posted about this in earlier posts about wade phillips. Remember, where i commented on a fact that a buffalo fan said, wade phillips would say while wade was head coach for the buffalo bills. Wade would say, im going to lunch for an hour. But good ole wade wouldnt come back that afternoon. What is Jerry Jones finally woke up to that, what wade was doing, and maybe some other coaches not pulling their weight because wade left for the day.

So, Jerry Jones is covering himself like businessmen do in contracts.

what is this is part of that issue, something that good ole wade has done last year. Remember, how many times did good ole wade give players an extra day off? So, when wade gave those players an extra day off, wouldnt it make sense, because the players arent there, then the head coach wouldnt have as much work to do either.

so, what if jerry jones is trying to cover himself on this issue?

If there is a shred of truth to Wade taking afternoon's off here, then I don't know what is more ludicrous. - the fact that Wade is still employed, or that Jerry is trying to force stipulations into *Reeves* contract to fix it.

 

[AbeBeta]

I don't think a "straight shooter" has an individual work for three days and slides a contract across the desk with topics that were never discussed to that level before.

Here's the contract, and, oh by the way, I am going to have to insist that you hit the Dave Campo Memorial timeclock each day. Thanks.

No, I think Jerry was legitimately surprised that Reeves would balk at such a clause. He's never that I can recall ever hired for a position like this before. He knows coaches are going to end up working 70+ hours a week and the rest of his staff are family members. This sort of deal is new territory for him. Do keep in mind that the owner that Jerry talks to the most is bat guano crazy, so his model for a job like this may have come from there.

Now if you want to say he's an idiot for not just removing that language, fine, I agree. But the rest really just stinks of borderline conspiracy theory thinkin'.