PDA

View Full Version : Larry Brown trying to get $53 million from Knicks



BigMac
09-23-2006, 12:02 PM
Larry Brown is seeking a $53.5-million payoff from the Knicks for firing him after only one season as the team's coach. Along with the $41 million that remained on the original five-year contract he signed last summer, Brown is asking for an additional 25 percent of the original value of the $50-million contract - an additional $12.5 million - as "liquidated damages" as a result of the firing.

That information was revealed Thursday in a 10-Q form filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission by the Knicks' parent company, Cablevision. The Sports Business Journal originally reported the story Friday on the Internet, but Newsday also obtained the 10-Q form, which is a public document.

Commissioner David Stern is expected to serve as an arbitrator between the sides Friday in Manhattan. A decision will not be immediately rendered.

Brown, who considered the Knicks his "dream job," was fired June 22 after a controversial season and was replaced by Knicks president Isiah Thomas. Garden chairman James Dolan reportedly attempted to buy out Brown's contract before he fired him, but Brown declined the buyout. In hindsight, it was to ensure he got the entire amount of the deal.

Under a heading that reads "Contract Disputes," Cablevision says Brown was "terminated with cause pursuant to his employment agreement with the Knicks" and that "in the event that Mr. Brown prevailed, the Knicks could be liable for $41 million pursuant to the employment agreement ... In addition ... Mr. Brown has requested an additional 25 percent of the total compensation as 'liquidated damages,' as well as attorneys' fees."

The section concludes with Cablevision stating its view that "no portion of this amount is owed to Mr. Brown and therefore no provision for any severance cost has been recorded in the accompanying financial statements."

Brown's lawyer, Joe Glass, did not return a phone call for comment. The Knicks declined comment. Commissioner David Stern is expected to serve as an arbitrator between the sides Friday in Manhattan. A decision will not be immediately rendered.

http://www.newsday.com/sports/printedition/ny-spknix234903601sep23,0,7113719.story?coll=ny-sports-print


****Now how can Stern be unbiased in this. Hmm. He's hired by the owners, paid by the owners (indirectly), takes the owners side in labor disputes with players.... Bottom line, Larry Brown is screwed.

Not saying if Brown is right or wrong but I am saying the he is screwed!

rabid
09-23-2006, 01:05 PM
After this, can you imagine any team in its right mind hiring Larry Brown again? I'd probably rather have Ron Artest back as one of the Pacemates than hire Larry Brown back as coach.

ABADays
09-23-2006, 01:06 PM
Larry Brown is seeking a $53.5-million payoff from the Knicks for firing him after only one season as the team's coach. Along with the $41 million that remained on the original five-year contract he signed last summer, Brown is asking for an additional 25 percent of the original value of the $50-million contract - an additional $12.5 million - as "liquidated damages" as a result of the firing.

That information was revealed Thursday in a 10-Q form filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission by the Knicks' parent company, Cablevision. The Sports Business Journal originally reported the story Friday on the Internet, but Newsday also obtained the 10-Q form, which is a public document.

Commissioner David Stern is expected to serve as an arbitrator between the sides Friday in Manhattan. A decision will not be immediately rendered.

Brown, who considered the Knicks his "dream job," was fired June 22 after a controversial season and was replaced by Knicks president Isiah Thomas. Garden chairman James Dolan reportedly attempted to buy out Brown's contract before he fired him, but Brown declined the buyout. In hindsight, it was to ensure he got the entire amount of the deal.

Under a heading that reads "Contract Disputes," Cablevision says Brown was "terminated with cause pursuant to his employment agreement with the Knicks" and that "in the event that Mr. Brown prevailed, the Knicks could be liable for $41 million pursuant to the employment agreement ... In addition ... Mr. Brown has requested an additional 25 percent of the total compensation as 'liquidated damages,' as well as attorneys' fees."

The section concludes with Cablevision stating its view that "no portion of this amount is owed to Mr. Brown and therefore no provision for any severance cost has been recorded in the accompanying financial statements."

Brown's lawyer, Joe Glass, did not return a phone call for comment. The Knicks declined comment. Commissioner David Stern is expected to serve as an arbitrator between the sides Friday in Manhattan. A decision will not be immediately rendered.

http://www.newsday.com/sports/printedition/ny-spknix234903601sep23,0,7113719.story?coll=ny-sports-print


****Now how can Stern be unbiased in this. Hmm. He's hired by the owners, paid by the owners (indirectly), takes the owners side in labor disputes with players.... Bottom line, Larry Brown is screwed.

Not saying if Brown is right or wrong but I am saying the he is screwed!

Well he would only be screwed if it was binding arbitration. But it is weird that the commissioner would be doing this instead of an independent.

thunderbird1245
09-23-2006, 01:15 PM
Im pretty sure I read back when this all started last spring that having Stern be the arbitrator in case of any dispute was put into the contract originally. The Commish didnt just jump in to this, nor was it agreed to after the fact....it was agreed to be the solution of any future problems all along. I dont know but assume that is the standard operating procedure and common language most contracts among coaches and non playing personnel in the NBA.

Of course, I dont know all the facts in this case (none of us do), but from what I do know, I personally think Larry Brown will win the rest of the money he is owed plus lawyer fees.

Just one more black eye on the Knicks franchise and another stain on the resume of Isiah Thomas.

Bball
09-23-2006, 02:26 PM
I doubt Brown loses this ultimately. The 'damages' might not happen, but the basic contract will still need to be honored. Possibly a small fine (well, relatively small when compared to the total (something 15% or less)) will be levied on Brown to address Brown's alleged breach of terms but I doubt anyone will find that an offense that effectively terminated the contract in whole. They might not call it a 'fine' but it effectively would be that.

That's assuming everything I've heard about this mess is substantially the whole of the arguments on both sides.

As for Stern hearing this... It does seem odd for this type of situation. OTOH, he's commissioner so maybe it isn't that odd as it seems at first glance. If he'd make a ruling that tends to bend over backwards for the owners it would raise some eyebrows. Look for him to 'split the baby' and give Brown less than he'd get in a court of law but much more than what NY wants to pay him.

-Bball

Mac_Daddy
09-23-2006, 02:30 PM
How much money has he made the past few seasons, when you add together his buyouts and all? I'd like to see that figure. He might very well be the highest paid sports figure, in terms of salary earned, during these past few years.

JayRedd
09-23-2006, 03:21 PM
After this, can you imagine any team in its right mind hiring Larry Brown again? I'd probably rather have Ron Artest back as one of the Pacemates than hire Larry Brown back as coach.

Not sure how you can put this on Larry. The Knicks bent over backwards to get him to come to MSG and he showed up and tried to do the exact same thing he has been doing since he was coaching the Jayhawks.

The Knicks front office gave the coach ZERO support in the "Tabloid Feuds" that continued all season long in the NYC papers between Brown and Marbury, where each acted like some high schoolers gossiping about the other guy. By the end of the season his entire team had quit on him. Before the Finals were even over, it was all the press that Brown was out. Then the Knicks front office gave him no word one way or the other for a solid 6 weeks. Didn't even have him in for a meeting. Hung him out to dry as a guy who'd already been fired in the press, but still had to attend Knick events as if he was actually coaching that team next year for well over a month.

Now the man just wants the ammount the Knicks agreed to pay him in their legally binding and guarenteed contract. How is Brown in the wrong here by any stretch of the imagination? He's asking for 25% more, yes. But that sounds like a negotiating move to ensure he does indeed get the actual 100% he's owed when the final ruling comes down.

I know "Next Town" Brown has done some things in his past. But here? He's entitled every penny of the original contract that the Knicks signed him for.

JayRedd
09-23-2006, 03:50 PM
How much money has he made the past few seasons, when you add together his buyouts and all? I'd like to see that figure. He might very well be the highest paid sports figure, in terms of salary earned, during these past few years.

Larry got a reported $5 mil for coaching the Pistons in 2004-2005.

And I couldn't find the exact publicized figure, but I seem to remember Larry got a $10 mil buyout on the three years/$18 mil he had left on the Pistons deal.

And he got $10 mil to "coach" the Knicks this year.

And he will likely (IMO) get at least most of the $41 left on his Knick deal.

If he gets all that, it would make $66 mil over two years.

Nice life.

Mac_Daddy
09-23-2006, 03:59 PM
Larry got a reported $5 mil for coaching the Pistons in 2004-2005.

And I couldn't find the exact publicized figure, but I seem to remember Larry got a $10 mil buyout on the three years/$18 mil he had left on the Pistons deal.

And he got $10 mil to "coach" the Knicks this year.

And he will likely (IMO) get at least most of the $41 left on his Knick deal.

If he gets all that, it would make $66 mil over two years.

Nice life.

I'd say.

brichard
09-23-2006, 04:32 PM
I must say I am scratching my head on this one as well. LB was brought in and he signed a contract. The team decided to release him, so now they are on the hook to pay him the balance. Ask Gerry Dinardo or Cam Cameron at IU. They each left and they still got paid.

Is it fair? Sure it is. In order to lure somebody to coach your team you agree to terms. If part of your terms included the word "guarantee," then you have to live with it. The fact that they were pursuing a buyout of the contract just goes to show you that they knew they owed it. If they didn't owe it, they would have just went on their seperate ways.

Larry Brown is not a perfect coach and I don't agree with every decision he's made. But you also have to put him in a pretty rare category of coaches who can turn around a franchise. And really, who else fits the bill for that? He is in a league of his own with his track record for taking a cellar dwellar to a contender. He is the Lou Holtz of NBA basketball.

Larry is a no nonsense pain in the butt. He demands defense, it is his way or the highway, he favors work ethic over talent, and he won't hesitate to go to the media if things aren't going his way. He doesn't stay long in one place and almost seems to doom himself at the end just as an excuse to take on something new.

But he freaking wins. I've seen the man turn around my beloved Pacers, he took the lowly LA Clippers to the post season, and he finally won an NBA Championship with the Pistons. I say finally, but for the type of business he is in (restoration projects,) championships are a pretty amazing accomplishment. I'd hire Brown in a minute if I were a GM b/c I know he could teach my team how to win. I wouldn't sign him to a long term deal, nor would I anticipate he would stick around for awhile. But I would smile as my stadium would be full within 2 years of his hire date based on his ability to make stuff happen.

The idiots in NY are countless. IT decided that it was more important to support the players instead of the coach. The old "tail wagging the dog" philosophy is perhaps the worst one to submit a team to. IT's ego and poor selection of players will continue to bring that franchise down. Losing Larry Brown did nothing to improve that franchise.

Bball
09-23-2006, 05:21 PM
Unless something has changed, the Knicks are claiming Brown breached the contract. It's not that they fired him and now just don't want to pay him (well, it is.... IMHO... but they are hanging their hat on some technical grounds). IIRC, he spoke to a reporter, from his car, and that created a situation that was in violation of his contract (so say the Knicks). I've not heard anything else as their reasoning. I can't remember if his contract barred him from speaking with the media on MSG/Knicks' property without permission or if he was barred from speaking to the media outside of that property.... or if he simply needed permission to speak with the media in any case. Whatever the case, if that is all they are using as their technicality then I don't think they'll get far. I don't see them getting off the hook completely. OTOH, anything that Stern would award them in a penalty for that would be better than paying the whole amount.

-Bball

NorCal_Pacerfan
09-23-2006, 06:47 PM
Not sure how you can put this on Larry. The Knicks bent over backwards to get him to come to MSG and he showed up and tried to do the exact same thing he has been doing since he was coaching the Jayhawks.

The Knicks front office gave the coach ZERO support in the "Tabloid Feuds" that continued all season long in the NYC papers between Brown and Marbury, where each acted like some high schoolers gossiping about the other guy. By the end of the season his entire team had quit on him. Before the Finals were even over, it was all the press that Brown was out. Then the Knicks front office gave him no word one way or the other for a solid 6 weeks. Didn't even have him in for a meeting. Hung him out to dry as a guy who'd already been fired in the press, but still had to attend Knick events as if he was actually coaching that team next year for well over a month.

Now the man just wants the ammount the Knicks agreed to pay him in their legally binding and guarenteed contract. How is Brown in the wrong here by any stretch of the imagination? He's asking for 25% more, yes. But that sounds like a negotiating move to ensure he does indeed get the actual 100% he's owed when the final ruling comes down.

I know "Next Town" Brown has done some things in his past. But here? He's entitled every penny of the original contract that the Knicks signed him for.


Well put.

DisplacedKnick
09-23-2006, 09:39 PM
Unless something has changed, the Knicks are claiming Brown breached the contract. It's not that they fired him and now just don't want to pay him (well, it is.... IMHO... but they are hanging their hat on some technical grounds). IIRC, he spoke to a reporter, from his car, and that created a situation that was in violation of his contract (so say the Knicks).
-Bball

Wasn't a violation of his contract but the Knicks had a media blackout going on and Brown's speaking with reporters was in direct violation of Dolan's orders.

That said, the Knicks are complete idiots and owe Brown the whole thing. Bunch of incompetent screw-ups.

JayRedd
09-23-2006, 10:50 PM
One other major factor working against Dolan and Zeke is that Brown may very well have no incentive to accept any sort of a buy-out settlement. Normally in these type of situations, the coach has significantly less leverage than Brown does here, because they want to get the buy-out finalized as soon as possible so they can get a new job.

Presumably, it's possilbe that Brown couldn't care less about the timeline. Some basketball people think he's ready to walk away from the game entirely. I'm not sure if this is true (I could easily seeing him want to get back on the sidelines after last year's fiasco), but his health is not good and as long as he doesn't want to coach in the NBA again, he can just chill and collect a $10 million paycheck for the next four years without ever accepting a lowball buy-out offer.

If I was a betting man (which I am, but not on matters this stupid), I'd wager LB will get over $30 million in this buyout.

Meanwhile....This is another reason that yall shouldn't worry about Rick getting an extension. If we end up ****ing the dog again this year and winning <42 games, we can still tell Carlisle to take a hike, and he'll be at TPTB's mercy, seeing as he'll want to get out of here as soon as possible so he can get busy coaching another team the following season.

For a young, aspiring coach like him, the Front Office really does have him by the balls. This extension is in reality about as meaningful as an NFL contract, i.e., he'll end getting a decent deal out of this, but all the years after this upcoming one are far from "guarenteed."

brichard
09-23-2006, 11:35 PM
Wasn't a violation of his contract but the Knicks had a media blackout going on and Brown's speaking with reporters was in direct violation of Dolan's orders.

That said, the Knicks are complete idiots and owe Brown the whole thing. Bunch of incompetent screw-ups.

Word. Sad but true my Knick friend. I'd tell you it can't get any worse than Isiah, but I don't want to tempt fate with those knuckleheads in your front office. :cool:

N8R
09-24-2006, 12:20 AM
They can afford whatever they end up having to pay him. They should pay him the rest of his contract but the extra is just bull and doesnt need to be paid.

DisplacedKnick
09-24-2006, 09:03 AM
They can afford whatever they end up having to pay him. They should pay him the rest of his contract but the extra is just bull and doesnt need to be paid.

Well, they could - except the MSG Division of Cablevision (which the Knicks are a part of) has been losing money the last few years - and it's been getting worse.

Eventually the shareholders and board will be sick of it and tell little Jimmy to take a hike, which is why, if it was possible, I'd love for Stern to add a "0" to the end of what Brown's asking for and force MSG to sell the team to avoid bankrupting the whole Division.

Friggin' dingbats - thought they wanted to hire Larry Brown - until Larry Brown started coaching the way Larry Brown always does his first year with a suck team by not accepting a bunch of prima donna crap, after which they decided they didn't want Larry Brown.

Complete idiots - I wouldn't let them manage my ant farm.

able
09-24-2006, 12:48 PM
LD will get at most half of what he's asking for, if that, and whether the Knicks deserve to have to pay him more or not is just as relevant as whether LB deserves to be paid that amount, in the end he willingly broke a clear cut rule and if you do that at work, you are gone to, no difference for him and whatever is going in the work-relationship is irrelevant to a degree where a judge would likely tell you in that situation that it is hard to believe that given the circumstances you were stupid enough to so clearly violate a rule and thus giving them a legit reason to kick your arse to the curb.

N8R
09-24-2006, 01:04 PM
Well, they could - except the MSG Division of Cablevision (which the Knicks are a part of) has been losing money the last few years - and it's been getting worse.

Eventually the shareholders and board will be sick of it and tell little Jimmy to take a hike, which is why, if it was possible, I'd love for Stern to add a "0" to the end of what Brown's asking for and force MSG to sell the team to avoid bankrupting the whole Division.

Friggin' dingbats - thought they wanted to hire Larry Brown - until Larry Brown started coaching the way Larry Brown always does his first year with a suck team by not accepting a bunch of prima donna crap, after which they decided they didn't want Larry Brown.

Complete idiots - I wouldn't let them manage my ant farm.


I didnt know they were slowly losing money but I mean when you have a payroll of $120 million plus coach and all the penalties of being over the cap you are looking at an expensively horrible team. They need to fire everyone at the top and almost start new with all their players and get their payroll down to like $60 million.

Brown deserves some money but not $53 million.

spreedom
09-24-2006, 06:13 PM
I almost think Brown sabotaged the team like 30 games into the season just so he could get fired and get paid money he doesn't deserve.

I can't even count how many times he publicly ripped his team apart, player-by-player, to completely destroy any trade value any of his players had.. then he demanded they trade for Jalen Rose.. who he later asked to have cut.

And, as I understand it, he knowingly broke team policy on several occasions, speaking on the record without a team rep present.

How many times can this guy play the victim and get paid for contributing nothing? The Knicks would have been better this year with no coach at all if you ask me..