Ben Howland

[Tugg Speedman]

Are pictures of him circulating or something?  Manning to Wake, Cunzo to Cal, Haith to Tulsa.  All this after criminals like Bruce Pearl (Auburn) and Kelvin Sampson (Houston) found employment.

What is going to take for Howland to get back into coaching?

[warriorchick]

Sounds to me that he is not all that eager to get back into the game unless he gets his price.

[MUCam]

Sounds to me that he is not all that eager to get back into the game unless he gets his price.

Does Howland still get paid by UCLA? If so, perhaps the compensation is contingent on a duty to mitigate, which would include good faith effort at finding a reasonably similar job with reasonably similar pay.

Howland, by floating his name out and declaring interest in coaching, satisfies that duty. If he says, "I don't want to coach; I just want to collect my sizeable UCLA paycheck," he obviously violates any duty to mitigate.

If he wants to just sit back and collect UCLA compensation, it would be very savvy of him to demonstrate "good faith" efforts to rejoin the coaching ranks. That way, if he is accused of failure to mitigate, he can point the X number of jobs he showed interest in and did not get.

I would not be surprised at all if he really isn't all that eager to get back in, assuming he still gets UCLA payments.

EDIT:

I found the following from an LA Times Article: "Howland's contract, which runs through 2018, has a $3.5-million buyout — $2.3 million for his 2013-14 pay and $1.2 million for his remaining base pay. The buyout can be "mitigated," Guerrero said, if Howland is hired elsewhere."

Maybe Howland never really intended on taking the Marquette position, or any other position. Maybe he is just a smart business man, enjoying UCLA coin and retirement at the same time.

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/mar/25/sports/la-sp-ucla-howland-fired-20130325

[slack00]

Are pictures of him circulating or something?  Manning to Wake, Cunzo to Cal, Haith to Tulsa.  All this after criminals like Bruce Pearl (Auburn) and Kelvin Sampson (Houston) found employment.

What is going to take for Howland to get back into coaching?

This article to be deleted from the entire Internet...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/magazine/02/28/ucla/index.html

[Jay Bee]

Does Howland still get paid by UCLA? If so, perhaps the compensation is contingent on a duty to mitigate, which would include good faith effort at finding a reasonably similar job with reasonably similar pay.

Howland, by floating his name out and declaring interest in coaching, satisfies that duty. If he says, "I don't want to coach; I just want to collect my sizeable UCLA paycheck," he obviously violates any duty to mitigate.

If he wants to just sit back and collect UCLA compensation, it would be very savvy of him to demonstrate "good faith" efforts to rejoin the coaching ranks. That way, if he is accused of failure to mitigate, he can point the X number of jobs he showed interest in and did not get.

I would not be surprised at all if he really isn't all that eager to get back in, assuming he still gets UCLA payments.

EDIT:

I found the following from an LA Times Article: "Howland's contract, which runs through 2018, has a $3.5-million buyout — $2.3 million for his 2013-14 pay and $1.2 million for his remaining base pay. The buyout can be "mitigated," Guerrero said, if Howland is hired elsewhere."

Maybe Howland never really intended on taking the Marquette position, or any other position. Maybe he is just a smart business man, enjoying UCLA coin and retirement at the same time.

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/mar/25/sports/la-sp-ucla-howland-fired-20130325

The LA Times and nearly all of the traditional media did a horrible job reporting on Howland's buyout before it happened. Late Night Hoops had it correct.

Howland was to receive $2.3MM by sitting out this past season.

For each of the next three years, UCLA will pay him $300k/yr unless he gets other work.

In the coaching world (at his level), the $300k/yr is not a significant amount. If he wants to coach, he's now ready - last year he would have been crazy to have worked.

[MUCam]

The LA Times and nearly all of the traditional media did a horrible job reporting on Howland's buyout before it happened. Late Night Hoops had it correct.

Howland was to receive $2.3MM by sitting out this past season.

For each of the next three years, UCLA will pay him $300k/yr unless he gets other work.

In the coaching world (at his level), the $300k/yr is not a significant amount. If he wants to coach, he's now ready - last year he would have been crazy to have worked.

Hey, Jerk. It is Good Friday. Why do you have to go and shoot down a novel theory like mine with cold hard facts?

Go pound sand.

[The Equalizer]

The LA Times and nearly all of the traditional media did a horrible job reporting on Howland's buyout before it happened. Late Night Hoops had it correct.

Howland was to receive $2.3MM by sitting out this past season.

For each of the next three years, UCLA will pay him $300k/yr unless he gets other work.

How do we actually know your post at Late Night Hoops "got it correct"? 

You have steadfastly refused to provide any link to any suppporting documentation or any 3rd party validation--either here or at Late Nite Hoops (ignoring the reference to the phony "Pleasant Avenue Atheltics", either a phantom company, or a play on the name of your own advisory company--either way, its not 3rd party or independent validation).

Maybe you got it right.  Maybe you didn't. 

Without true 3rd party independent proof, we'll never know. 

last year he would have been crazy to have worked.

Wrong.  There are five reasons why was actually stupid for him not to have worked last year.

1. He would have been paid close to (and possibly more than) his old UCLA salary working for another team anyway, so there was no strong finanical incentive not to work.

2. That new team probably would have given him a multiyear contract at his first year salary. Even without a built-in pay increases, a seven year deal at $2.3 million would have been a MUCH better deal than one year at $2.3 million plus three more at $300K.  Howland could have taken a pay cut to a half million on a 7 year deal and wound up better off than he would under the UCLA buyout.

3. The longer he goes without working, the harder it is for him to land a job. It leads to questions about the skelletons in his closet. ADs rightly question why a great coach like him hasn't found a job a year later (maybe there's truth to the SI article). BTW, there is a six-month window that affects all job seekers--if you're out more than six months, it becomes much harder to get a job:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-terrifying-reality-of-long-term-unemployment/274957/

4. It opens the door to questions over his motivation.  ADs start to wonder if he's lazy because he would rather do nothing and take UCLA's money instead of earning it--therefore ADs question if he's really passionate about coaching.

5. It makes it harder for him to recruit becuase he's been out of the game for a year. He has no current relationships with HS players, hasn't been watching teams as a coach or recruiter, thus increasing the reluctance of teams to hire him (expecially at a premium salary). 

Howland was stupid not to have taken the best offer he could get immedeately after leaving UCLA, and now he's paying the price.  Perhaps there were reasons back then which explain why he couldn't get a job, and if so those still affect him today. But sitting out a year has essentially made him toxic. 

If he sat out simply to stick it to UCLA and collect his buyout, he's just stupid. 

[MU82]

Howland was stupid not to have taken the best offer he could get immedeately after leaving UCLA, and now he's paying the price.  Perhaps there were reasons back then which explain why he couldn't get a job, and if so those still affect him today. But sitting out a year has essentially made him toxic. 

If he sat out simply to stick it to UCLA and collect his buyout, he's just stupid. 

I don't know Howland or the situation, so I'm just throwing something out here ...

Is it possible that he needed a mental break? He'd been in the pressure cooker for so long, maybe he was just fried and needed a season off so he didn't go bonkers. Maybe he felt that taking a year off and recharging the battery would make him a better coach for his next employer.

If that was the case, is the opinion still that he was stupid?

[Tugg Speedman]

I don't know Howland or the situation, so I'm just throwing something out here ...

Is it possible that he needed a mental break? He'd been in the pressure cooker for so long, maybe he was just fried and needed a season off so he didn't go bonkers. Maybe he felt that taking a year off and recharging the battery would make him a better coach for his next employer.

If that was the case, is the opinion still that he was stupid?

Yes but this year he's made it clear he wants back in, actively lobbied for the MU job and now EVERYONE is passing on him.

[keefe]

EVERYONE thinks he wants too much

[chapman]

Tennessee is open.  Wonder if that'll be his landing spot.  

[SaintPaulWarrior]

How do we actually know your post at Late Night Hoops "got it correct"?  

You have steadfastly refused to provide any link to any suppporting documentation or any 3rd party validation--either here or at Late Nite Hoops (ignoring the reference to the phony "Pleasant Avenue Atheltics", either a phantom company, or a play on the name of your own advisory company--either way, its not 3rd party or independent validation).

Maybe you got it right.  Maybe you didn't.  

Without true 3rd party independent proof, we'll never know.  


Wrong.  There are five reasons why was actually stupid for him not to have worked last year.

1. He would have been paid close to (and possibly more than) his old UCLA salary working for another team anyway, so there was no strong finanical incentive not to work.

2. That new team probably would have given him a multiyear contract at his first year salary. Even without a built-in pay increases, a seven year deal at $2.3 million would have been a MUCH better deal than one year at $2.3 million plus three more at $300K.  Howland could have taken a pay cut to a half million on a 7 year deal and wound up better off than he would under the UCLA buyout.

3. The longer he goes without working, the harder it is for him to land a job. It leads to questions about the skelletons in his closet. ADs rightly question why a great coach like him hasn't found a job a year later (maybe there's truth to the SI article). BTW, there is a six-month window that affects all job seekers--if you're out more than six months, it becomes much harder to get a job:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-terrifying-reality-of-long-term-unemployment/274957/

4. It opens the door to questions over his motivation.  ADs start to wonder if he's lazy because he would rather do nothing and take UCLA's money instead of earning it--therefore ADs question if he's really passionate about coaching.

5. It makes it harder for him to recruit becuase he's been out of the game for a year. He has no current relationships with HS players, hasn't been watching teams as a coach or recruiter, thus increasing the reluctance of teams to hire him (expecially at a premium salary).  

Howland was stupid not to have taken the best offer he could get immedeately after leaving UCLA, and now he's paying the price.  Perhaps there were reasons back then which explain why he couldn't get a job, and if so those still affect him today. But sitting out a year has essentially made him toxic.  

If he sat out simply to stick it to UCLA and collect his buyout, he's just stupid.  

Besides the Vikings being the "consensus" do you have any proof that he does not know what he is talking about?  Do you have any idea how much he follows HS and college hoops?  If you have knowledge of a fact why, in this day and age, do you have to supply "a link"?  My source is JayBee so I do have a link/source and I agree with him.

I won't even comment on your spelling.  Oops I guess I just did.

[Jay Bee]

How do we actually know your post at Late Night Hoops "got it correct"? 

You have steadfastly refused to provide any link to any suppporting documentation or any 3rd party validation--either here or at Late Nite Hoops (ignoring the reference to the phony "Pleasant Avenue Atheltics", either a phantom company, or a play on the name of your own advisory company--either way, its not 3rd party or independent validation).

Maybe you got it right.  Maybe you didn't. 

Without true 3rd party independent proof, we'll never know. 


Wrong.  There are five reasons why was actually stupid for him not to have worked last year.

1. He would have been paid close to (and possibly more than) his old UCLA salary working for another team anyway, so there was no strong finanical incentive not to work.

2. That new team probably would have given him a multiyear contract at his first year salary. Even without a built-in pay increases, a seven year deal at $2.3 million would have been a MUCH better deal than one year at $2.3 million plus three more at $300K.  Howland could have taken a pay cut to a half million on a 7 year deal and wound up better off than he would under the UCLA buyout.

3. The longer he goes without working, the harder it is for him to land a job. It leads to questions about the skelletons in his closet. ADs rightly question why a great coach like him hasn't found a job a year later (maybe there's truth to the SI article). BTW, there is a six-month window that affects all job seekers--if you're out more than six months, it becomes much harder to get a job:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-terrifying-reality-of-long-term-unemployment/274957/

4. It opens the door to questions over his motivation.  ADs start to wonder if he's lazy because he would rather do nothing and take UCLA's money instead of earning it--therefore ADs question if he's really passionate about coaching.

5. It makes it harder for him to recruit becuase he's been out of the game for a year. He has no current relationships with HS players, hasn't been watching teams as a coach or recruiter, thus increasing the reluctance of teams to hire him (expecially at a premium salary). 

Howland was stupid not to have taken the best offer he could get immedeately after leaving UCLA, and now he's paying the price.  Perhaps there were reasons back then which explain why he couldn't get a job, and if so those still affect him today. But sitting out a year has essentially made him toxic. 

If he sat out simply to stick it to UCLA and collect his buyout, he's just stupid. 

lol

[MU82]

Yes but this year he's made it clear he wants back in, actively lobbied for the MU job and now EVERYONE is passing on him.

I understand that he has not been able to land a job since he wanted back in. That doesn't mean he was wrong to take a year off if coaching for that year would have been bad for him mentally.

Again, I don't know if this was a factor at all. I'm just saying that people in demanding professions sometimes do take a year off, especially if their finances allow it (which clearly his do).

[The Equalizer]

lol

Glad you're amused. 

My question: why did you go through all the subterfuge? 

Why did you link here to your own blog without telling us it was your blog?  Why did your blog cite your "advisory" firm without acknowlging your ownership.  Why not just post the real evidence that supports your case, rather than pretending you own other posts represent some sort of authority?

Ironically, what you did (creating sources) would be a firable offense if you were at the LA Times or any of those other media or publications. 

[Jay Bee]

Glad you're amused. 

My question: why did you go through all the subterfuge? 

Why did you link here to your own blog without telling us it was your blog?  Why did your blog cite your "advisory" firm without acknowlging your ownership.  Why not just post the real evidence that supports your case, rather than pretending you own other posts represent some sort of authority?

Ironically, what you did (creating sources) would be a firable offense if you were at the LA Times or any of those other media or publications. 

[SaintPaulWarrior]

Glad you're amused. 

My question: why did you go through all the subterfuge? 

Why did you link here to your own blog without telling us it was your blog?  Why did your blog cite your "advisory" firm without acknowlging your ownership.  Why not just post the real evidence that supports your case, rather than pretending you own other posts represent some sort of authority?

Ironically, what you did (creating sources) would be a firable offense if you were at the LA Times or any of those other media or publications. 

I am very amused by the minute.  Why are you so hung up on "sources".  Obviously the "sources" have been proven wrong.  Believe me, JayBee has sources and he is the source.

[Newsdreams]

I am very amused by the minute.  Why are you so hung up on "sources".  Obviously the "sources" have been proven wrong.  Believe me, JayBee has sources and he is the source.

Source? Can you settle this debate?

[Anti-Dentite]

Glad you're amused. 

My question: why did you go through all the subterfuge? 

Why did you link here to your own blog without telling us it was your blog?  Why did your blog cite your "advisory" firm without acknowlging your ownership.  Why not just post the real evidence that supports your case, rather than pretending you own other posts represent some sort of authority?

Ironically, what you did (creating sources) would be a firable offense if you were at the LA Times or any of those other media or publications. 

what planet are you from, you're coming off like a real dork in your last couple of diatribes.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Thought I wouldn't have to break this one out again but...

Howland does NOT pass the sniff test.

Not saying that some program someday won't eventually hold their nose and hire him, but his resume is not enough to overcome the stench for many programs.

That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if Tennessee nabbed him

[Tugg Speedman]

Thought I wouldn't have to break this one out again but...

Howland does NOT pass the sniff test.

Not saying that some program someday won't eventually hold their nose and hire him, but his resume is not enough to overcome the stench for many programs.

That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if Tennessee nabbed him

See Bruce Pearl, he gets a job and his first signee is a juco that was arrested a few months ago.

Kelvin Sampson gets a job, need I say more.

Someone will hold their nose and hire Howland. 

[tower912]

what planet are you from, you're coming off like a real dork in your last couple of diatribes.

You haven't been around here long, have you?    Do a little digging.   His tone is completely consistent. 

[Groin_pull]

See Bruce Pearl, he gets a job and his first signee is a juco that was arrested a few months ago.

Kelvin Sampson gets a job, need I say more.

Someone will hold their nose and hire Howland. 

Would like to know what Howland did to get lumped in with those two.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Would like to know what Howland did to get lumped in with those two.

Not just lumped but actually worse than those two. They got jobs.

Though in all honesty, Pearl was barely stinky. Sampson on the other hand...

[MU82]

Would like to know what Howland did to get lumped in with those two.

Re-read that Sports Illustrated piece and tell me that you, as a parent, would be excited to have your son play for a Howland-coached team.