(06-14-2018 07:41 AM)JMUNation Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 05:29 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 11:12 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  The fact that Brady still sparks debate proves that it wasn't a no brainer. His time with JMU was a mixed bag- real close at times to getting over the hump but filled with disappointment. I think some of the off the court stuff obviously put Matt on thin ice with the admin but ultimately it was the back to back 20 win teams who were non competitive in the CAAT that led to him losing his job. When you are a little skeptical of a guy due to the contract issue, the APR stuff, the player turnover etc. and then you sit there and watch his team get trounced in back to back CAAT's that's the last straw.

I think that’s a fair summary. It’s ultimately what got Lefty canned too. Getting repeatedly bounced, and often early, from the CAAT will get any JMU MBB HC fired.

Certainly some of this but rest assured, JMU wanted him gone long before the CAA tournament losses. You don’t embarrass your boss.

IMO the “bosses” embarrassed themselves by 1) Not doing their due dilligence in reading (or understanding) MB’s Marist contract, and 2) Not responding responsibly to the Marist President’s inquiry prior to the filing of the Marist suit. In the end it turned out to be a muddied mess, which could have been easily avoided.

(06-14-2018 09:35 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 07:41 AM)JMUNation Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 05:29 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 11:12 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  The fact that Brady still sparks debate proves that it wasn't a no brainer. His time with JMU was a mixed bag- real close at times to getting over the hump but filled with disappointment. I think some of the off the court stuff obviously put Matt on thin ice with the admin but ultimately it was the back to back 20 win teams who were non competitive in the CAAT that led to him losing his job. When you are a little skeptical of a guy due to the contract issue, the APR stuff, the player turnover etc. and then you sit there and watch his team get trounced in back to back CAAT's that's the last straw.

I think that’s a fair summary. It’s ultimately what got Lefty canned too. Getting repeatedly bounced, and often early, from the CAAT will get any JMU MBB HC fired.

Certainly some of this but rest assured, JMU wanted him gone long before the CAA tournament losses. You don’t embarrass your boss.

IMO the “bosses” embarrassed themselves by 1) Not doing their due dilligence in reading (or understanding) MB’s Marist contract, and 2) Not responding responsibly to the Marist President’s inquiry prior to the filing of the Marist suit. In the end it turned out to be a muddied mess, which could have been easily avoided.

Sure JMU Admin has some fault for not thoroughly reviewing Brady's Marist contract........but they did point blank ask Brady these questions and Brady flat-out LIED about his existing contract. So yeah JMU got egg on their face for taking Brady at his word. Not a good way to establish a working, conducive relationship with you boss.

Personally, I think JMU should have fired Brady right at that point for lying about his previous contract during the hiring process and that would have been a justifiable reason for termination.

I see it no different than years ago when George O'Leary got caught lying on his resume and Notre Dame rescinded his job offer.

(06-14-2018 09:58 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 09:35 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 07:41 AM)JMUNation Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 05:29 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 11:12 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  The fact that Brady still sparks debate proves that it wasn't a no brainer. His time with JMU was a mixed bag- real close at times to getting over the hump but filled with disappointment. I think some of the off the court stuff obviously put Matt on thin ice with the admin but ultimately it was the back to back 20 win teams who were non competitive in the CAAT that led to him losing his job. When you are a little skeptical of a guy due to the contract issue, the APR stuff, the player turnover etc. and then you sit there and watch his team get trounced in back to back CAAT's that's the last straw.

I think that’s a fair summary. It’s ultimately what got Lefty canned too. Getting repeatedly bounced, and often early, from the CAAT will get any JMU MBB HC fired.

Certainly some of this but rest assured, JMU wanted him gone long before the CAA tournament losses. You don’t embarrass your boss.

IMO the “bosses” embarrassed themselves by 1) Not doing their due dilligence in reading (or understanding) MB’s Marist contract, and 2) Not responding responsibly to the Marist President’s inquiry prior to the filing of the Marist suit. In the end it turned out to be a muddied mess, which could have been easily avoided.

Sure JMU Admin has some fault for not thoroughly reviewing Brady's Marist contract........but they did point blank ask Brady these questions and Brady flat-out LIED about his existing contract. So yeah JMU got egg on their face for taking Brady at his word. Not a good way to establish a working, conducive relationship with you boss.

Personally, I think JMU should have fired Brady right at that point for lying about his previous contract during the hiring process and that would have been a justifiable reason for termination.

I see it no different than years ago when George O'Leary got caught lying on his resume and Notre Dame rescinded his job offer.

You were present with JB and MB when the Marist contract was discussed?

(06-14-2018 11:16 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 09:58 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 09:35 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 07:41 AM)JMUNation Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 05:29 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  I think that’s a fair summary. It’s ultimately what got Lefty canned too. Getting repeatedly bounced, and often early, from the CAAT will get any JMU MBB HC fired.

Certainly some of this but rest assured, JMU wanted him gone long before the CAA tournament losses. You don’t embarrass your boss.

IMO the “bosses” embarrassed themselves by 1) Not doing their due dilligence in reading (or understanding) MB’s Marist contract, and 2) Not responding responsibly to the Marist President’s inquiry prior to the filing of the Marist suit. In the end it turned out to be a muddied mess, which could have been easily avoided.

Sure JMU Admin has some fault for not thoroughly reviewing Brady's Marist contract........but they did point blank ask Brady these questions and Brady flat-out LIED about his existing contract. So yeah JMU got egg on their face for taking Brady at his word. Not a good way to establish a working, conducive relationship with you boss.

Personally, I think JMU should have fired Brady right at that point for lying about his previous contract during the hiring process and that would have been a justifiable reason for termination.

I see it no different than years ago when George O'Leary got caught lying on his resume and Notre Dame rescinded his job offer.

You were present with JB and MB when the Marist contract was discussed?

Just as present as you were LH.....but I can read and hear and it had been numerous times that JMU Admin had asked these questions and that Brady had responded that it should not be any issues with his Marist contract. I don't even recall Brady ever disputing those statements. If that had been the case I think he would have spoken up. Yes Bourne never saw the Marist contract prior to the job offer but it is a reasonable assumption to make that Brady did not breach his existing contract in the process by:
1. Not getting his permission/release to seek a new coaching job (kind like players had to ask for release to transfer)
2. Brady was supposed to leave all files (recruiting info at Marist)
2. Continuing to contact and recruit players that he had recruited while at Marist. (Julius Wells, Andrey Semenov, Devon Moore, and Trevon Flores)

Brady even boasted in his interview from a packet delivered to the Atlanta based recruiting firm...this is all from the trial.

If anyone cares to look there is some interesting quotes from trial testimony from articles on this Marist site....I think most of these are from old Matt Stoss articles.

https://maristredfoxhoops.proboards.com/...brady-suit

But hell LH was probably Brady's personal lawyer and has some greater level of detail.

(06-14-2018 11:40 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 11:16 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 09:58 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 09:35 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 07:41 AM)JMUNation Wrote:  Certainly some of this but rest assured, JMU wanted him gone long before the CAA tournament losses. You don’t embarrass your boss.

IMO the “bosses” embarrassed themselves by 1) Not doing their due dilligence in reading (or understanding) MB’s Marist contract, and 2) Not responding responsibly to the Marist President’s inquiry prior to the filing of the Marist suit. In the end it turned out to be a muddied mess, which could have been easily avoided.

Sure JMU Admin has some fault for not thoroughly reviewing Brady's Marist contract........but they did point blank ask Brady these questions and Brady flat-out LIED about his existing contract. So yeah JMU got egg on their face for taking Brady at his word. Not a good way to establish a working, conducive relationship with you boss.

Personally, I think JMU should have fired Brady right at that point for lying about his previous contract during the hiring process and that would have been a justifiable reason for termination.

I see it no different than years ago when George O'Leary got caught lying on his resume and Notre Dame rescinded his job offer.

You were present with JB and MB when the Marist contract was discussed?

Just as present as you were LH.....but I can read and hear and it had been numerous times that JMU Admin had asked these questions and that Brady had responded that it should not be any issues with his Marist contract. I don't even recall Brady ever disputing those statements. If that had been the case I think he would have spoken up. Yes Bourne never saw the Marist contract prior to the job offer but it is a reasonable assumption to make that Brady did not breach his existing contract in the process by:
1. Not getting his permission/release to seek a new coaching job (kind like players had to ask for release to transfer)
2. Brady was supposed to leave all files (recruiting info at Marist)
2. Continuing to contact and recruit players that he had recruited while at Marist. (Julius Wells, Andrey Semenov, Devon Moore, and Trevon Flores)

Brady even boasted in his interview from a packet delivered to the Atlanta based recruiting firm...this is all from the trial.

If anyone cares to look there is some interesting quotes from trial testimony from articles on this Marist site....I think most of these are from old Matt Stoss articles.

https://maristredfoxhoops.proboards.com/...brady-suit

But hell LH was probably Brady's personal lawyer and has some greater level of detail.

Without naming names, Shady spells out in even better detail than I could what happened.

JMU was not perfect in their handling of the situation but right or wrong they felt it was Matt’s responsibility. They have done nothing wrong beyond not reviewing Matt’s contract. I sincerely doubt they would have lost in court but the Commonwealths Attorney made the decision to settle so everyone could move on.

Matt was given every opportunity to make all of this right. He was asked by the administration to go up to Marist, speak directly to the President and make things right. Matt ignored that request. Let’s not forget that Matt later lost in court so if the fault was with JMU then why did Marist move forward in their pursuit of Matt after JMU settled? By the way, the court ordered Matt to pay $1.

I put the blame meter at 95% Matt and 5% JMU.

The state of VA taxpayers had to foot the bill to the tune of $100k and there’s only 5% responsibility from the people whose hiring decision caused that outcome? Must be nice to be Charlie & Jeff!

(06-14-2018 11:40 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 11:16 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 09:58 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 09:35 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 07:41 AM)JMUNation Wrote:  Certainly some of this but rest assured, JMU wanted him gone long before the CAA tournament losses. You don’t embarrass your boss.

IMO the “bosses” embarrassed themselves by 1) Not doing their due dilligence in reading (or understanding) MB’s Marist contract, and 2) Not responding responsibly to the Marist President’s inquiry prior to the filing of the Marist suit. In the end it turned out to be a muddied mess, which could have been easily avoided.

Sure JMU Admin has some fault for not thoroughly reviewing Brady's Marist contract........but they did point blank ask Brady these questions and Brady flat-out LIED about his existing contract. So yeah JMU got egg on their face for taking Brady at his word. Not a good way to establish a working, conducive relationship with you boss.

Personally, I think JMU should have fired Brady right at that point for lying about his previous contract during the hiring process and that would have been a justifiable reason for termination.

I see it no different than years ago when George O'Leary got caught lying on his resume and Notre Dame rescinded his job offer.

You were present with JB and MB when the Marist contract was discussed?

Just as present as you were LH.....but I can read and hear and it had been numerous times that JMU Admin had asked these questions and that Brady had responded that it should not be any issues with his Marist contract. I don't even recall Brady ever disputing those statements. If that had been the case I think he would have spoken up. Yes Bourne never saw the Marist contract prior to the job offer but it is a reasonable assumption to make that Brady did not breach his existing contract in the process by:
1. Not getting his permission/release to seek a new coaching job (kind like players had to ask for release to transfer)
2. Brady was supposed to leave all files (recruiting info at Marist)
2. Continuing to contact and recruit players that he had recruited while at Marist. (Julius Wells, Andrey Semenov, Devon Moore, and Trevon Flores)

Brady even boasted in his interview from a packet delivered to the Atlanta based recruiting firm...this is all from the trial.

If anyone cares to look there is some interesting quotes from trial testimony from articles on this Marist site....I think most of these are from old Matt Stoss articles.

https://maristredfoxhoops.proboards.com/...brady-suit

But hell LH was probably Brady's personal lawyer and has some greater level of detail.

If I was MB's attorney I'd be bragging about the damn good job I did for Matt.

The transcripts and reporting around the Marist butt-hurt over MB jilting them is an interesting read, but while JMU settled for $100k (essentially for liquidated damages...a "buyout" for MB whose contract had no buyout clause), and Marist was seeking $425k from MB (in a separate, but related trial in NY), the fact is the NY jury decided MB owed Marist no damages.

I also don't believe MB "lied" about anything to JB or the JMU administration. At worse you can say MB and the JMU administration seemingly didn't think any terms in the Marist contract were worth discussing, and both parties simply ignored the Marist contract as binding (again because it had no buyout clause). In the end JMU got tagged for $100k, and MB for $0. MB would likely have been found innocent too had MB been smart enough to have received a written release from the Marist AD, as opposed to just a verbal nod.

My take-away from all the reports (those legal and from the news reports of the day) is that the Marist AD knew MB was leaving to take the JMU position. The Marist AD also knew the recruits contacted by MB (while still the Marist HC) were likely to follow MB to JMU, and there "was no way to stop them." This interpretation is supported by the trial testimony of the Marist AD, and the various people (assistant coaches and players) who testified on MB's behalf.

The Marist President, however, got his ego involved, and didn't like getting played by a HC who just a few months earlier had signed a contract extension while pledging his undying devotion to Marist. Had Linn Rose, CK and JB played nice, the entire mess could have been resolved without going to court. LR, CK and JB, however, really didn't give a hoot about Marist, and were intent on hiring MB regardless. Nobody in our administration even thought a contract (without a buyout clause) might restrict MB from accepting the JMU offer (this is still America, right? Anyone can resign a position and move on in life), and yet JB did learn of MB's contract directly from the Marist AD, and before any of the recruits MB brought to JMU signed.

So, make of it what you will. It's interesting chatter for a message board, but you'll never convince me MB lied. That's a Marist point of view, and unreasonable given the official testimony and jury verdict.


Here's a link to an interesting analysis of the outcome,

http://www.primerus.com/business-law-art...827201.htm

...and the following is a bit of copy from the H'Burg DNR beat reporter, who I assume was quoting from the trial transcript.

DNR Report

Bourne said he didn’t ask to see the contract before hiring Brady.

“Prior to the day you offered him the job,” Hannigan (Marist's Atty.) asked, “did he tell you, or to your knowledge any other administrator at JMU at any time, about the clause in his contract prohibiting him from recruiting the Marist recruits and offering them scholarships?”

“No,” Bourne replied.

Bourne said, however, that Murray had told him about the clause.

“So when you offered him the job, you didn’t know about the clause in his Marist contract?” Hannigan asked.

Bourne replied: “I had been told by his boss, Tim Murray, that there were clauses in his contract to that effect, but I had not seen an actual copy of the contract.”

Another question concerned the date Brady began offering scholarships to the former Marist recruits and whether Madison knew about the clause at that time. The final signature on Moore’s scholarship was dated May 15, apparently about two weeks after Bourne saw the contract.

END

(06-14-2018 02:49 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  The state of VA taxpayers had to foot the bill to the tune of $100k and there’s only 5% responsibility from the people whose hiring decision caused that outcome? Must be nice to be Charlie & Jeff!

Hyper:

Once a suit is filed, it becomes the responsibility of the Commonwealth’s Attorney. The CA made the decision how the tax payers money would be spent.

I'm curious about the blame meter.

What was the court ruling? Was Matt ruled personally liable for a contract breech due to his lies?

(06-14-2018 09:44 PM)JMUNation Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 02:49 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  The state of VA taxpayers had to foot the bill to the tune of $100k and there’s only 5% responsibility from the people whose hiring decision caused that outcome? Must be nice to be Charlie & Jeff!

Hyper:

Once a suit is filed, it becomes the responsibility of the Commonwealth’s Attorney. The CA made the decision how the tax payers money would be spent.

That makes sense as Charlie, Jeff et al are both employees of JMU and employees of the state of VA. But if Matt Brady falsified his resume (which was implied above) or he lied about the terms of his employment at Marist, I'm thinking he would have some personal liability and JMU/the state of VA could have been projected under force majeure. Any thoughts on this? Does anyone who is opining have experience with contract law other than signing your initials when you rent a car at the airport?!?

(06-15-2018 10:54 AM)PhillyDuke Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 09:44 PM)JMUNation Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 02:49 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  The state of VA taxpayers had to foot the bill to the tune of $100k and there’s only 5% responsibility from the people whose hiring decision caused that outcome? Must be nice to be Charlie & Jeff!

Hyper:

Once a suit is filed, it becomes the responsibility of the Commonwealth’s Attorney. The CA made the decision how the tax payers money would be spent.

That makes sense as Charlie, Jeff et al are both employees of JMU and employees of the state of VA. But if Matt Brady falsified his resume (which was implied above) or he lied about the terms of his employment at Marist, I'm thinking he would have some personal liability and JMU/the state of VA could have been projected under force majeure. Any thoughts on this? Does anyone who is opining have experience with contract law other than signing your initials when you rent a car at the airport?!?

I think JMU/State of VA agreed to pay $100K to Marist to simply make it go-away and be done with this mess from their perspective.

Brady was found guilty in lawsuit just to damages claim was tiny ($1). I think at that point since Marist had already settled and got paid by JMU/State of VA they were more about the principle of the matter with Brady than they were about the settlement amount with him directly.

(06-15-2018 10:54 AM)PhillyDuke Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 09:44 PM)JMUNation Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 02:49 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  The state of VA taxpayers had to foot the bill to the tune of $100k and there’s only 5% responsibility from the people whose hiring decision caused that outcome? Must be nice to be Charlie & Jeff!

Hyper:

Once a suit is filed, it becomes the responsibility of the Commonwealth’s Attorney. The CA made the decision how the tax payers money would be spent.

That makes sense as Charlie, Jeff et al are both employees of JMU and employees of the state of VA. But if Matt Brady falsified his resume (which was implied above) or he lied about the terms of his employment at Marist, I'm thinking he would have some personal liability and JMU/the state of VA could have been projected under force majeure. Any thoughts on this? Does anyone who is opining have experience with contract law other than signing your initials when you rent a car at the airport?!?

I'm being picky I guess, but it's the State Attorney General's Office, not the Commonwealth's Attorney that represents public universities.

Marist sued both JMU and Brady individually. JMU settled, Brady went to trial. Personally, I think the case against JMU was very weak and that the AG's office could have successfully argued that Brady's Marist contract provisions were unenforceable with regard to JMU - but these were pretty unique contract provisions, they would have had to hire a NY firm, etc., so it's understandable that they would choose to settle.

Brady's trial result seems fair - he violated his Marist contract but damages are impossible to determine.

ok, as a lifelong ny resident and marist fan during Brady's tenure. Marist lawsuit was ridiculous. Another example of Marist ineptness at running d1 sports.....Just look at their program since matt left and they sued. They have not been able to hire and attract quality coaches due to the silly lawsuit. None of the players matt brought to jmu had signed with Marist. Marist may have won the lawsuit.....and their $1...but in the long run their program was never the same.

Recently, Marist opened up their wallets to hire John Dunne (St. Peters)....great choice....but what is the first thing Dunne does. yup thats right he brings in a kid who verbally committed to him at St. Peters. Funny how now its ok.

(06-15-2018 01:34 PM)nyduke Wrote:  ok, as a lifelong ny resident and marist fan during Brady's tenure. Marist lawsuit was ridiculous. Another example of Marist ineptness at running d1 sports.....Just look at their program since matt left and they sued. They have not been able to hire and attract quality coaches due to the silly lawsuit. None of the players matt brought to jmu had signed with Marist. Marist may have won the lawsuit.....and their $1...but in the long run their program was never the same.

Recently, Marist opened up their wallets to hire John Dunne (St. Peters)....great choice....but what is the first thing Dunne does. yup thats right he brings in a kid who verbally committed to him at St. Peters. Funny how now its ok.

Yep, I wonder if JB knows this. I know it's small potatoes to him, but he might get a chuckle or even if MB knows this.

(06-15-2018 01:34 PM)nyduke Wrote:  ok, as a lifelong ny resident and marist fan during Brady's tenure. Marist lawsuit was ridiculous. Another example of Marist ineptness at running d1 sports.....Just look at their program since matt left and they sued. They have not been able to hire and attract quality coaches due to the silly lawsuit. None of the players matt brought to jmu had signed with Marist. Marist may have won the lawsuit.....and their $1...but in the long run their program was never the same.

Recently, Marist opened up their wallets to hire John Dunne (St. Peters)....great choice....but what is the first thing Dunne does. yup thats right he brings in a kid who verbally committed to him at St. Peters. Funny how now its ok.

I believe Wells had signed or at a minimum verbally committed.

(06-15-2018 01:34 PM)nyduke Wrote:  ok, as a lifelong ny resident and marist fan during Brady's tenure. Marist lawsuit was ridiculous. Another example of Marist ineptness at running d1 sports.....Just look at their program since matt left and they sued. They have not been able to hire and attract quality coaches due to the silly lawsuit. None of the players matt brought to jmu had signed with Marist. Marist may have won the lawsuit.....and their $1...but in the long run their program was never the same.

Recently, Marist opened up their wallets to hire John Dunne (St. Peters)....great choice....but what is the first thing Dunne does. yup thats right he brings in a kid who verbally committed to him at St. Peters. Funny how now its ok.

I believe Wells had signed or at a minimum verbally committed.