Josh McDaniels Decides to Stay with New England

[TheKillerNacho]

12 minutes ago, The LBC said:

Again, people need to be a little more mindful of the language they're using here.

McDaniels never "hired" any assistants.  There may have been agreements that when he was hired he would turn around and hire/get them hired, but he had no capacity to speak, negotiate, or hire on behalf of the Colts organization because he was still part of the Patriots organization.  Folks are tossing terms like "business ethics" around way too loosely.  The only thing that business ethics dictates he owes anyone he'd discussed potentially (because until he was in a position/capacity to actually do hiring himself that's all it was - potential) bringing on board is the courtesy of timely personal correspondence to inform them that that is no longer an option because he's no longer taking the job.

The notion that he ought to be obligated to take a job despite receiving what he deemed to be a superior counter-offer because he discussed potential contingencies with people is bleeding-heart absurdity.  But then McDaniels is an easy target.

Eh, McDaniels is in fact a scumbag for doing this. Typically if you are a person who gives your word you will do something and do not, you are a scumbag. Forget everything else - Josh did the Colts dirty and he will never get another HC gig again because of this. Except maybe the Patriots.

[GOGRIESE]

Just now, Ketchup said:

I get both sides here. McDaniels strung them along all playoffs with Indy thinking they had their guy. But if McDaniels didn’t want to be in Indy, he would be doing the Colts a disservice by sticking with it when that’s not where he wants to be. Their are plenty of options still for the Colts and with McDaniels failure as a HC previously, and now this, they probably dodged a bullet. 

Sure. But it shouldnt have gotten to the point where he was assembling a staff then and having the Colts hire them. 

[Superduperman]

There are questions here that people aren't asking (yet)

- Did Kraft do this specifically to screw the Colts?

- If he didn't, why would he wait until after the Super Bowl? What happened in the last day or two that convinced Kraft he had to make a final push to keep McDaniels?

- If he didn't, do you think he might have also asked Patricia to stay? Perhaps he asked him first? Perhaps Patricia turned him down?

- Did Kraft make this move with Belichick's knowledge and/or blessing? If so, again, why did they wait until after the SB to make a final push?

- If not, how do you think Belichick feels about Kraft making deals behind his back to promise one of his assistants the HC job?

- Do you think Belichick is the kind of guy who enjoys having the end of his tenure as Patriots HC acknowledged by the owner in ANY way?

- Do you think Brady had input into this? If so, revisit previous three questions.

[Forge]

The problem with putting all the blame on McDaniels is that everyone assumes that this NE offer was on the table the entire time. That's is not an established fact.

If there was shadiness going on here, I believe it was more likely by Kraft, with the specific intention to screw the colts. McDaniels simply got a better offer at the last second. He knew what this would do to his chances of ever being a HC outside of NE, and still decided to make that call

[Ketchup]

2 minutes ago, GOGRIESE said:

Sure. But it shouldnt have gotten to the point where he was assembling a staff then and having the Colts hire them. 

Agreed. McDaniels is going to take a huge PR hit on this. 

[Dr LBC]

2 minutes ago, stallyns said:

Someone suggested that McDaniels being offered the successor to the HC job in NE would violate the Rooney Rule, I’ve been arguing it won’t. Based on, Jim Caldwell in Indy, DeCosta in Baltimore, and one more I caught, Jim Mora Jr to Mike Holmgren in Seattle.

Yeah.  I was aware.  You clarifying that, hopefully, means others are picking up on that now as well.  I haven't read the full text of the succession rule, but I believe it was also meant to work hand-in-hand with the internal-promotion aims (i.e. when the Cowboys opted to let Wade Phillips go to promote Jason Garrett because Jerry was worried about losing Garrett to a head-coaching promotional hire the same way they lost Payton). Basically, that a formal "retirement" doesn't have to be involved, just often is.  IIRC, the Rooney Rule is applicable if/when you're opening up to interviewing candidate outside your own organization (i.e. if you're going to interview another franchise's personnel, you have to at least interview a minority candidate as well, be it one from inside your organization or outside).

[mission27]

Just now, Forge said:

The problem with putting all the blame on McDaniels is that everyone assumes that this NE offer was on the table the entire time. That's is not an established fact.

Per Mike Reis, the Patriots would not address McDaniels future and a contract until after the Super Bowl.  Over the past 48 hours Kraft put on a full court press.  Its quite possible that, combined with his first and only day working with Irsay and the Colts front office, convinced him he was making a mistake and should stay in New England. 

 

[wcblack34]

2 minutes ago, The LBC said:

They'd have a hard time getting those monetary "damages" rewarded considering they would have been acting on decisions they themselves made before actually having an enforceable contract.  They aren't going to be able to realistically prove that McDaniels' pulling out has/had any adverse effect on season ticket renewal.  

There are all sorts of damages they can claim outside of ticket sales. If they signed contracts with the coordinators on the good-faith basis that McDaniels would be their coach, they can claim those as salaries if they are above and beyond what they may have paid in-house guys/other candidates. They can claim any costs associated with interviewing/hiring new candidates. Any money they have to pay the new HC above and beyond what they would have paid McDaniels (because Toub has leverage he didn't have before). There are lots of things they can claim. If they can prove that they agreed verbally on years and monetary compensation, that is enough to find an enforceable verbal contract in most states. Aside from that, doctrines such as equitable and promissory estoppel would likely apply. All sorts of theories they could pursue him on. 

Just the time and effort they could make McDaniels expend during the time he's supposed to be preparing the Patriots O for next season could make it worth it. They don't have to "win" the suit to win. 

[nagahide13]

10 minutes ago, The LBC said:

 Folks are tossing terms like "business ethics" around way too loosely.

Are you serious? Backing out of a verbal commitment is something that's very, very commonly regarded as demonstrating poor business ethics. You're splitting hairs with a razor while people are throwing haymakers. Saying that McDaniels' decision is unethical is... tame. It's both tame and directly correct.

Of course he shouldn't be punished, and of course he shouldn't be forced into some kind of NFL-head-coach conscription situation. But to say that his actions are within the expected spectrum of decorum is flat out ludicrous.

[mission27]

Just now, nagahide13 said:

Backing out of a verbal commitment is something that's very, very commonly regarded as demonstrating poor business ethics. You're splitting hairs with a razor while people are throwing haymakers.

Personal employment agreements are a grey area.  There is a general understanding you have to do what is best for you and your family and if you get a better offer, you are going to back out. 

I've been on both sides of that and there are hurt feelings sometimes but people usually get it.

[Wyld Stallyns]

1 minute ago, mission27 said:

Per Mike Reis, the Patriots would not address McDaniels future and a contract until after the Super Bowl.  Over the past 48 hours Kraft put on a full court press.  Its quite possible that, combined with his first and only day working with Irsay and the Colts front office, convinced him he was making a mistake and should stay in New England. 

 

McDaniels had a second interview right after the AFC Championship where it’s speculated they hashed out plans, assistants etc. On top of that day.

[Dr LBC]

3 minutes ago, Forge said:

The problem with putting all the blame on McDaniels is that everyone assumes that this NE offer was on the table the entire time. That's is not an established fact.

If there was shadiness going on here, I believe it was more likely by Kraft, with the specific intention to screw the colts. McDaniels simply got a better offer at the last second. He knew what this would do to his chances of ever being a HC outside of NE, and still decided to make that call

I don't know that it was specifically with the intention of screwing Indy in mind so much as it was, the Patriots were focused on trying to win the Super Bowl, that was their priority.  It might be considered a professional courtesy to give McDaniels a counter-offer in the most timely fashion, but there's certainly no obligation to do that.  And from a selfish perspective which they're entirely allowed to have (if not should be expected to have), it's in their best interest NOT to counter until after their own season had concluded because they want McDaniels focused on the remaining business he has to conduct as a Patriot, not already thinking ahead to what he's going to do as a Colt.

This is one of those reasons why people say you take a massive risk when you're trying to hire off the staffs of the teams with those Wild Card week byes or of teams which are favorites to go to the Super Bowl - particularly when you're not in a position like the Lions were where they were hiring a HC who was largely willing to leave their offensive staff from the previous administration intact.

[Forge]

1 minute ago, mission27 said:

Personal employment agreements are a grey area.  There is a general understanding you have to do what is best for you and your family and if you get a better offer, you are going to back out. 

I've been on both sides of that and there are hurt feelings sometimes but people usually get it.

Did this last year after the birth of my son. I interviewed 3 times, was offered the job, etc etc. Then my current job came with offer of more money and I could work from home. Was a no brainier for me

[Forge]

Just now, The LBC said:

I don't know that it was specifically with the intention of screwing Indy in mind so much as it was, the Patriots were focused on trying to win the Super Bowl, that was their priority.  It might be considered a professional courtesy to give McDaniels a counter-offer in the most timely fashion, but there's certainly no obligation to do that.  And from a selfish perspective which they're entirely allowed to have (if not should be expected to have), it's in their best interest NOT to counter until after their own season had concluded because they want McDaniels focused on the remaining business he has to conduct as a Patriot, not already thinking ahead to what he's going to do as a Colt.

This is one of those reasons why people say you take a massive risk when you're trying to hire off the staffs of the teams with those Wild Card week byes or of teams which are favorites to go to the Super Bowl - particularly when you're not in a position like the Lions were where they were hiring a HC who was largely willing to leave their offensive staff from the previous administration intact.

Yeah I don't want to say there was some sketchy stuff going on, because I don't know. But I believe if there was, it was more likely from Kraft than McDaniels. You could be right and they just wanted to focusand screwing the colts was only a bonus lol

[nagahide13]

Just now, mission27 said:

Personal employment agreements are a grey area.  There is a general understanding you have to do what is best for you and your family and if you get a better offer, you are going to back out. 

I've been on both sides of that and there are hurt feelings sometimes but people usually get it.

That's absolutely true. I don't entirely stand by my earlier statement because I (obviously) don't have a firm grasp of the ins and outs of this specific situation. My official statement; On the surface, this appears to be poor behavior.