Why dd JJ/Wade want to bring Dan Reeves in, if we were satisfied with Garrett?

[jobberone]

If Reeves is already on the job then there is a major falling out, you can give a very educated guess that principles were involved. And with knowing Jerry I'd bet big money that Jerry didn't want to hear all that Reeves had to say. And knowing Reeves he didn't want to have that job just to have a job.

As hard as I used to work I would not want to work with someone who asked me to account for all my hours. It would piss me off badly to work 80+ hours a week and someone to ask me to account for it.

Is Texas a right to work state? If so then you don't need a reason to fire someone. Besides you can always find a reason to fire someone. No jury in the world is going to go against someone working much harder than they do because they didn't account for all their hours. That's the kink of verbiage you use for hourly employees up to mid level management if at all.

And I wouldn't care if its in every NFL coaches contract which I highly doubt but admit to not knowing. It's a silly *** clause for someone you know is working much longer than 40 hours a week. It sounds just like a Jerry thing to me again stating I don't actually know for a fact.

 

[theogt]

As hard as I used to work I would not want to work with someone who asked me to account for all my hours. It would piss me off badly to work 80+ hours a week and someone to ask me to account for it.

Try being a lawyer with billable hours.

Is Texas a right to work state? If so then you don't need a reason to fire someone. Besides you can always find a reason to fire someone. No jury in the world is going to go against someone working much harder than they do because they didn't account for all their hours. That's the kink of verbiage you use for hourly employees up to mid level management if at all.

None of this matters, because it's a contract. The "right to work" laws go out the window if there's a contract.

 

[odog422]

We don't know. But we do have what Jerry told us. And I'm not willing to call him a complete liar.

That's ok by me that you're not. I disagree. In the interests of PR I absolutely believe Jerry has no qualms with telling a bold face lie. In this instance, I would be more inclined to believe that he has had something similar in SOME coaching contracts, but absolutely not all of them.

I'm sure he's never seen another contract with it in his career. But I'm sure in his career he's only seen about four coaching contracts in his career -- his own.

I wouldn't be so sure. As a HC who assembled his own staffs previously, I'm sure he had some input and knowledge, if nothing else to be able to communicate effectively the terms of employment with those who he sought to add to his staff. I also don't think you can effectively throw out his personal experience with his own four contracts if this is SOP, as you suggested may be the case.

 

[jobberone]

Try being a lawyer with billable hours.

None of this matters, because it's a contract. The "right to work" laws go out the window if there's a contract.

Who cares about lawyers. We're talking coaches and I left my own profession out of it. The point is someone who works extremely long hours doesn't have to account for his time.

And right to work means you can fire without cause. Of course it is still relevant. The language of the contract holds unless the laws of the state supercede it. That's my understanding. It's academic anyway. There is always something you can hang your hat on to fire someone or in this case to make them quit.