Started By
Message
re: Hog fans: How ironclad is Enos's non-compete clause?
Posted on 2/9/17 at 8:52 am to GenesChin
Posted on 2/9/17 at 8:52 am to GenesChin
quote:
Bama would end up winning the final verdict of the validity of the enforceability of the non compete
Anyone trying to pretend to understand what would happen is being a little ignorant.
This post was edited on 2/9/17 at 8:54 am
0
Posted on 2/9/17 at 8:54 am to rockiee
quote:
The biggest issue would be if the scope is too large which I don't think it is in this situation.
Scope + Duration from when I looked into breaking a non compete awhile back.
Enos' almost for sure wouldn't hold up in court from what I learned. Just got to believe it wouldn't be immediately dismissed either
Even if you know you'll win, the cost of winning just isn't worth it
Posted on 2/9/17 at 8:54 am to rockiee
Yea - the reason for it is to be a major deterrent, both from a time and effort standpoint and from a strictly monetary standpoint.
If a guy wants to leave and coach somewhere else he's going to do it. A non-compete is not going to literally stop him from doing it in all likelihood. However, it will stop an athletic department (or higher ups) from wanting to deal with all the time, money and PR crap that will rise up from doing it.
And by doing that, it accomplishes its goal, which is to add another layer of security for the school keeping the guy they want.
If a guy wants to leave and coach somewhere else he's going to do it. A non-compete is not going to literally stop him from doing it in all likelihood. However, it will stop an athletic department (or higher ups) from wanting to deal with all the time, money and PR crap that will rise up from doing it.
And by doing that, it accomplishes its goal, which is to add another layer of security for the school keeping the guy they want.
This post was edited on 2/9/17 at 8:55 am
Posted on 2/9/17 at 8:54 am to GenesChin
quote:
but Bama would end up winning the final verdict of the validity of the enforceability of the non compete
Why do you say that? Something about it that makes it overly broad or unreasonable? I haven't seen it but if it's limited in scope (can't take equivalent job at another SEC school, but could for example take OC job out of conference or could take HC job in conference) and limited in time then it could very well be enforceable.
Posted on 2/9/17 at 8:55 am to GenesChin
quote:This isn't true at all. They get enforced all of the time. This is a common misperception in the public.
Non Compete clauses are typically near impossible to enforce.
Posted on 2/9/17 at 8:55 am to GenesChin
quote:
If Bama bought him out and "gifted" Bret some buffet coupons, they could have him.
Posted on 2/9/17 at 8:56 am to PearlJam
quote:
They get enforced all of the time.
They do, but generally in specific industries with specific precedents and a pretty specific template of the parameters of it.
I could be wrong, but I don't think there is any precedent for a fight like this regarding a college football coach. So, it'd be a mess in terms of legal back and forth and the public nature of it. And, in the end, it could be ruled enforceable and in probably result in a giant sum of $$$ in lieu of it being broken.
This post was edited on 2/9/17 at 8:58 am
Posted on 2/9/17 at 8:57 am to GenesChin
quote:
Scope + Duration from when I looked into breaking a non compete awhile back.
Sure but in this situation, Scope would be the bigger factor if you look at the contract.
quote:
Even if you know you'll win, the cost of winning just isn't worth it
Well, I agree that it would be annoying either way but no attorney would look at that and say "ya we are going to win this"
Posted on 2/9/17 at 8:58 am to Triple Daves
They get enforced over a very broad scope of industries, but I agree that coaching isn't one I've seen litigated before.
Without seeing the language of the NCA and knowing the choice of law/venue provisions, no one can really even give an educated guess as to enforceability.
Without seeing the language of the NCA and knowing the choice of law/venue provisions, no one can really even give an educated guess as to enforceability.
This post was edited on 2/9/17 at 9:00 am
Posted on 2/9/17 at 8:59 am to Triple Daves
quote:
They do, but generally in specific industries with specific precedents and a pretty specific template of the parameters of it.
Exactly and that is why no one really knows how it would play out in this situation in the courtroom. Arkansas would have a decent argument for precedent in other areas of employment.
Posted on 2/9/17 at 9:00 am to Triple Daves
quote:
Yea - the reason for it is to be a major deterrent, both from a time and effort standpoint and from a strictly monetary standpoint.
If a guy wants to leave and coach somewhere else he's going to do it. A non-compete is not going to literally stop him from doing it in all likelihood. However, it will stop an athletic department (or higher ups) from wanting to deal with all the time, money and PR crap that will rise up from doing it.
Ya, I should be clear in saying that I don't believe the contract would ever physically stop him from leaving but I do think that it has a chance to stand up in court.
Posted on 2/9/17 at 9:02 am to PearlJam
It's a weird deal. He would be considered a state (i.e. government) employee. Not sure how legitimately enforceable the contract would be, but as has been discussed, it does make for a headache most would want to avoid.
My question would be, as an Arky fan (or as Bert), would you really want a contract to be the reason the guy stayed if he really wanted to leave (for any place, not Bama specifically)? If a guy wants to go, let him go.
My question would be, as an Arky fan (or as Bert), would you really want a contract to be the reason the guy stayed if he really wanted to leave (for any place, not Bama specifically)? If a guy wants to go, let him go.
Posted on 2/9/17 at 9:02 am to PearlJam
quote:
Without seeing the language of the NCA and knowing the choice of law/venue provisions, no one can really even give an educated guess as to enforceability.
I believe its pretty vague, but it still depends on the state wear he is going, as I recall. Had Georgia not changed a law a few years back, I believe it was unenforceable in the state of Georgia(or something like that)
Posted on 2/9/17 at 9:02 am to rockiee
The biggest risk is that enforcing the NCA doesn't just involve money damages, a court could enjoin your newly hired offensive coordinator from coaching. When that injunction might be handed down is speculation at best.
This post was edited on 2/9/17 at 9:22 am
Posted on 2/9/17 at 9:03 am to rockiee
...and to be perfectly honest with everyone here, as a Razorback fan, the bloom is somewhat off the rose for me in regards to Enos. I think he's become a shadow of himself or what he was in 2015. last year, his play calling was off the wall.
Posted on 2/9/17 at 9:06 am to hogcard1964
quote:
...and to be perfectly honest with everyone here, as a Razorback fan, the bloom is somewhat off the rose for me in regards to Enos. I think he's become a shadow of himself or what he was in 2015. last year, his play calling was off the wall.
Interesting. I continue to be impressed with him. I think he would absolutely kill it at Alabama.
This post was edited on 2/9/17 at 9:14 am
Posted on 2/9/17 at 9:06 am to PearlJam
quote:
no one can really even give an educated guess as to enforceability.
And that is a helluva mess to jump into for an offensive coordinator.
Pretty damn smart on Arkansas' part, honestly. They basically created a web of uncertainty and said you can try but good luck.
Posted on 2/9/17 at 9:20 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
it still depends on the state wear he is going, as I recall. Had Georgia not changed a law a few years back, I believe it was unenforceable in the state of Georgia(or something like that)
It does but that would be something else that would be new in this regard as far as I know. California ruled a while back that they will not enforce non-compete clauses that were agreed on out of state. Of course if Georgia pushed the issue last year and made an offer. University of Arkansas would be filing the case in Arkansas because that is were the contract was signed. From there everyone is just guessing what would happen.
Posted on 2/9/17 at 9:22 am to Triple Daves
quote:
Pretty damn smart on Arkansas' part, honestly. They basically created a web of uncertainty and said you can try but good luck.
Very smart by Bert. It would be smart for any small to middle tier programs to begin creating contracts like this to protect some of their coaches from the elite programs. Eventually this is going to be challenged in the court but I don't think it will be this time.
Posted on 2/9/17 at 9:23 am to rockiee
quote:
It would be smart for any small to middle tier programs to begin creating contracts like this to protect some of their coaches from the elite programs.
The key, of course, is that guys have to sign them.
Page 2 of 4
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News