-
Posts
42613 -
Joined
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Posts posted by TwiceHorn
-
-
On 11/11/2025 at 11:46 PM, Hairy Biped said:
So, my question with regards to the “Duty to Mitigate” clause, is how far does that go? Does he have to keep looking for a coaching job, any coaching job, until he finds one? Is he forced to accept a coordinator job at a shitty place like Youngstown State or something like that, if that's all who's offering? How long is he required to make the effort? I mean, can they effectively force him to take a job that he deems beneath him and if he refuses, they accuse him of acting in bad faith? My guess is that ultimately both sides will come to some sort of settlement to avoid having to address those situations, but if they don't, then what?
There are no bright line rules. You can't just sit around and collect checks, you've got to seek other employment. You can't intentionally underemploy yourself to keep the checks big. Nor can you unreasonably decline a job because it's somehow "beneath you." You can't be expected to find a head coaching job that exceeds your current salary or is some arbitrary 75, 80% of it, either.
You have four years from the time the contract is breached until you must file suit or lose the claim. Without contract language to the contrary (setting out a "buyout" or "liquidated damages") you'd be entitled to the monthly or periodic payments you'd have been entitled to if still employed, offset by the income of whatever employment you obtain. So, your obligation to mitigate or avoid damages extends as long as your contract might have, or resolution occurs, by lawsuit, settlement, whatever.
In a trial, the coach is apt to argue that he couldn't get any better job than whatever he got, whatever it is, while the school is apt to argue that he should have sought/accepted some assistant/coordinator job at some large percentage of his salary. The jury gets to sort it out.
Yes, it is a situation that begs for settlement/compromise.
-
4
-
-
4 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:
Hard to fall off when you were never on….
That doesn't fly either.
Sark was publicly drunk and humiliating himself at UW and USC ten years ago.
If he never stopped drinking, he'd couldn't hold a press conference today without puking. Or go three hours on Saturday without a twelve-pack or the equivalent.
An alcoholic like that doesn't get control of his drinking for a $10M/year job or an unlimited NIL budget.
It. Just. Gets. Worse.
-
4
-
-
2 hours ago, Newy25 said:
Cognitive dissonance is one of the most powerful human conditions. I just do not know how you convinced yourself that Sark, a former addict/alcoholic is incapable of falling off the wagon.I did no such thing.
But, as a former alcoholic, I know what falling off the wagon looks like for a guy who was fired for publicly being drunk on the job.
The nature of the disease is such that once control is lost, it's never regained, by long abstinence or human intervention. If he had fallen off the wagon in a way that interfered substantially with his coaching duties, it wouldn't be the subject of rumors, and as mentioned previously, his football woes would be the least of them.
There are plenty of explanations for Sark's shortcomings that do not involve that.
-
6
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:
Very good for a QB starting for his first season. And he's getting better.
He's gone from pretty, pretty bad to pretty. pretty good.
Wish it had been a smoother transition for him, I was really worried that he was a complete bust for a while there. And worried for him personally.
-
4
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, John Coctostan said:
Ancient history.
And irrelevant according to the current brain trust.
-
Just now, Rimbo said:
If you truly find it hard to believe that our head coach, a notorious recovering alcoholic, might have fallen back into a bottle given what we've seen on the field and heard rumored about off of it (and I can tell you that at least one of those really nasty things is NOT merely a rumor), then man... you're the kind of mark con men dream of coming across.
Well out with it then. What is that really nasty thing that's not merely a rumor?
Although it can happen, a guy like Sark that falls off the wagon usually creates a lot bigger and more obvious problems than those of his football team. I haven't seen anything objective that indicates that Sark is drinking. Pretty sure we'd know.
Second, given his history, if he'd fallen off the wagon in the off-season, I would expect him to be terminated with cause, success notwithstanding. Mid-season might be a different story.
-
4
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, WinningIsHard said:
No it’s a culmination of things, that was just the last straw. He speaks constantly about paying attention to details. I don’t think he’s capable of beating good coaches year in and year out. NIL gives a few programs a chance to be good every year even with a bad coach. Talent evaluation is another big one I think he just flat misses on, if it’s his assistants letting him down then that’s still his fault. The portal has been embarrassing. The penalties is pretty stupid too. Take it all together and we have a 50/50 shot to be great or shitty basically every game lol. Just my opinion.
The flip side of going for it is an INT in the short game or turning over the ball on downs with 30 seconds left, to an offense that had been running through us pretty well to that point.
Also, curiously, we had relatively few penalties yesterday from any of the usual suspects.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Rimbo said:
But seriously, what you missed is:
We hired a recovering alcoholic to be our head football coach, hoping that he would meet his potential if he stayed sober, and knowing the absolute shitshow that would happen if he didn't.
Sometime before this calendar year, he fell off the wagon, and we have yet to hear the entirety of the shitshow that has followed.
The only reason we have 8 wins and not fewer this year (so far) is because we have high end talent, a pretty great staff of assistant coaches, and a great support staff and athletic department that have tried to keep boat afloat. We have won this year in spite of our talented head coach, not because of him.
Nah, what he missed was people repeating the same bullshit over and over and over again.
And a few memes.
-
7
-
-
16 minutes ago, Red Five said:
Drives me crazy. You google where to watch it, and the answer is Prime. "Cool, I've got that." Then you go to fire it up and it's "Sure, that'll be $19.99."
Use justwatch.com. IMDB's where to watch also lets you know whether it's a ppv, or rental or what.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, PittsburghTiger said:
Pretty crazy how we jumped on Tech. After last week nobody saw that happening. Nobody. I think one of the big keys was our LB group. When healthy I think they are the best in the nation. They’ve been banged up but everyone was playing yesterday.
When Mason has time to throw he is very good. And our backfield is talented. It was a huge win for us, one I did not see coming. The Lovelace INT for a TD saved Duzz’s dumbass. It was a great read by him, pretty much the same thing James Harrison did against the Cardinals in the Super Bowl.
I think both teams are in a good spot. We both have missed opportunities that will bother us all winter and into the summer.
Been meaning to ask, but Pitt + Auburn seems to be a rather incongruous, if not bizarre combo. Unless you're an engineer.
-
47 minutes ago, Js1 said:
Our fans are legitimately insane
He's been one of the saner ones, which is why I commented.
Sure, it was disappointing. Arch took that deep shot, which I think was on him more than the play call and could have been DPI, it was close. We ran Tre twice for 9 yards. I suppose maybe we should have tried a short/intermediate route, but you don't want to turn it over there, or put it to one side or the other if you have to kick.
Maybe go for it, but not a lot of time to score.
Getting the ball back after the half, I was ok with taking the FG.
-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, WinningIsHard said:
I like sark, I defended him for a while. The end of the 2nd quarter against a terrible arky defense with an explosive offense in year 5 is the last straw. Their punter gave you a TD. Young football team, some struggles with a chance to emphatically slam the mother fucking door and give yourself some breathing room. Sark took the FG. That’s why he will never beat day, smart, lanning etc. You have to practice those moments against shitty teams so you can execute them against good teams. He needs to move on. The undisciplined nature of his teams, the inability to evaluate talent (recruiting and portal misses) and the lack of game day awareness is too much to overcome. Lanning or freeman, Texas needs one of those guys.
Seems a strange thing to abandon Sark over.
Did you want more deep shots? Go for it?
-
6 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:
I feel like this isn’t just an AI thing.The amount of jackwagons that now comment on everything and think they know shit has skyrocketed, regardless of the validity of their thoughts or answers.
AI is only reflecting our cultural AI is only reflecting our cultural Dunning-Kruger.
Well, yeah. They're training it on material mostly crawled from the internet, which includes a lot of dogshit.
It has authority because it's the "computer" without human intervention.
But it returns what it's "cued" with, so if you prompt it with conspiratorial dogshit, you're gonna get something consonant with conspiratorial dogshit.
-
1 minute ago, Vanilla Strange Gato said:
Time in program?
The complaint here is Sark doesn’t develop players.
Which is it?
We've had WR improve. Like Worthy. Wingo seems to be improving before our eyes.
I'm not one of those that claims no development.
-
2
-
-
So, haven't seen much discussion about the benching of Taylen Green.
Seems he's kind of the engine that makes their offense go, even if a bit of a turnover machine.
The frosh did ok I guess, but I wonder if Green might have made it closer, or less close.
-
6 minutes ago, Captainant said:
The thing is, if you ask neutral questions it gives reasonably useful and measured answers. If you have a coocoo for cocoa puffs framing and question, it leans into that and reflects it back to you. It's like a dog barking at a mirror, and it's driving the qanon crowd even more insane by validating and repeating their nonsense back to them
Seems like it goes to the fundamental neural-network nature of AI in pattern-matching.
And the perhaps even more fundamental nature of numerical computing: GIGO.
-
4
-
1
-
1
-
-
Gonna do a patent applied for surly thread jack.
I'm so disappointed bout Dwight. Didn't know he had a rep as a dickhead. Now I see that Mary Chapin Carpenter song.
In interviews, he always seemed like a level-headed, thoughtful type. Never seen anything political from him, now see some 25-year-old references to being a Libertarian.
Twenty-five years ago was prime time for a lot of us disenchanted with American politics to claim libertarianism, and also to either come to our senses or fucking double down in the intervening time period.
Fucking hell.
-
3
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, kevwun said:
I wouldn't call Baxter a flop, but he's not the same player since the knee injury. He was looking like a good back before it.
Well, it remains to be seen, but it seems we had a lot of eggs in the Baxter gon be back with a vengeance basket as a complement to Tre. That is a bigger back that could maybe make his own holes.
And he hasn't been very effective this year.
-
1
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, wood said:
If the OL hadn't been a complete floating dumpster fire from day 1, he'd have improved a lot quicker, too.
I think the WR, too.
RB still suffers at the hands of the OL.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Just now, Hard Times said:
We don't need DB's. We need a DB coach who knows what the fuck he's doing.
My sense of it as well.
Need to shore up the OL. WR and RB dysfunction I think mostly a product of OL. But we could stand a bigger RB with Baxter seeming to flop. Maybe a WR. Probably a TE. Time in program plus youngsters might take care of that.
Sarkco just needs to have an "opposite day" this off-season. Whatever he did in Spring 2025, do the opposite thing.
-
3
-
-
-
Michael Clayton.
Not the longest list of stars, or the biggest stars, but a very well-thought-out application of their talents.
And none of them really typecast.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, SizzleChest said:
His contract is no different than Beard's.
Real talk on the contract. It would seem really incumbent on the University/System to have some sort of clause that permits termination on resumption of substance abuse or something similar.
If for no other reason than to waive ADA application/accommodations, if that can be waived.
Although kind of embarrassing for both sides, a person actually in recovery would understand and welcome it.
-
3
-
-
9 hours ago, bluto said:
I chuckled when I read “leaflet drop” and just knowing without any doubt the leaflets would have numerous critical grammatical and spelling errors. In addition to just the lunacy of such an antiquated tactic
La elección fue robbada.
ROBBADA!
Gracias por su atención en este asunto.
-
3
-
2
-
1
-

Gone posters
in Please do this better?
Posted
One thing odd about Sack. First off, he's an employment lawyer, of the plaintiff's variety, and seemed to handle employment discrimination cases with some regularity and presumably some degree of success. He was, accordingly, critical of the heavily anti-plaintiff burden of proof in those cases, which is not a very Trumpy attitude, using Trumpy loosely as pro-business, anti-minority.
Also, he had done some pro bono criminal defense litigation of the type intended to change the law in a way beneficial to underrepresented types, ie poors and minorities.
And, he often helped explain why tort reform was bullshit.
So, before the politics became acute, he seemed a lot more reasonable than he became later on.