Clay/Matt -- Bielema Buyout Question?

Football Insider Board
#1

A few days ago during the coaching search, Mike Irwin wrote (on the other board) that he had heard that Arkansas has recently stopped paying Bielema’s buyout. Before Anderson was fired, it was suggested that we might not let him go this year because there wasn’t money to get a new coach. Once he was gone, there suddenly seemed to be a willingness to spend big money (if needed) to get a new coach.

Have you heard anything about the buyout payments being stopped for some reason? I don’t think Irwin ever said why this had supposedly happened because I don’t think he knew, but he had apparently heard something.

#2

No, Bielema is still getting the buyout money. It’s a monthly payment and it hasn’t stopped.

#3

You might want to check again.

#4

So far, no one will confirm that. I’ll dig a little deeper.

#5

They won’t publicly, and why should they? I’m surprised Bielema hasn’t sued them, it’s my understanding that April is the second month of no payment. Maybe someone there had been pulling my leg since the Super Bowl.

#6

[quote=“RICEPIG1”]

They won’t publicly, and why should they? I’m surprised Bielema hasn’t sued them, it’s my understanding that April is the second month of no payment. Maybe someone there has been pulling my leg since the Super Bowl.

#7

If and when it ends up in court, that will make it public.

#8

Have you heard why they supposedly stopped ?

#9

No, nothing official,

#10

He is allowed to make a certain amount without effecting the buyout. If he’s making more than that amount with the Pats, then that would be the sticking point. He would still qualify for the buyout, but at a less rate – if it’s more than the allowed amount.

#11

If true, it won’t take long to be a public matter unless there is negotiating going on over the Pat’s salary inclusion and only temporary.

#12

For what it’s worth, I have checked into this and do not have a concrete answer. I’m still trying.

#13

Tried to tell y’all.
https://www.arkansasbusiness.com/articl … um=twitter

#14

Like I said, I never received a concrete answer. No one wanted to talk about it on or off the record.

#15

Wouldn’t to me either, or wouldn’t give a reason for not paying, just that they weren’t.

#16

The reason for not paying is that instead of looking for a real job, BB was essentially volunteer coaching at New England. Which eventually paid off in a real job (he has been named the Pats’ DL coach) but interning doesn’t fulfill that clause in his contract.

I suspect Scott Varady was willing to talk to Gwen Moritz on the record now because BB does have an actual coaching job.

#17

Interning wasn’t necessarily the problem, not actively pursuing other jobs violated his contract.

#18

Yeah, he was interning instead of pursuing employment. Tomato, tomahto.

#19

If interning doesn’t qualify as a job search then what does, mailing or emailing resumes and interviews-by phone or in person? Hitting up the local unemployment office on a weekly basis? I’m sure there was an interview with the Pats and Coach Belicheck beforehand.

#20

The idea/requirement is to make a good faith effort to offset what UA is paying him. Intentionally working for peanuts for Belichick does not satisfy that requirement.