According to Brad Sturdy, the University of Illinois paid $2.5 million to send Mike Thomas on his way. This is notable for several reasons and the following is my speculation:
a. I recall that Thomas base salary is/was $500k per year. If the customary duration of an AD contract is 5 years, that means that he got the FULL amount of the contract with NO offset. That is terrible negotiating by whomever fired Thomas.
b. If he is being paid for 60 months of a 60 month contract, the contract had to have been signed in the last 6 months. That means that the boss of Thomas in early summer thought there was a need to tie up Thomas in fear of losing him to another job. WHO was that person? Is that person in the same position today? If so, how do they justify reversing that decision today? This is such a supremely bad deal that collusion is one of the first thoughts. If not collusion, how did Thomas' standing reverse itself so drastically in 6 months?
c. Thomas was fired in November, weeks before the end of the football season with an interim coach, and by an interim Chancellor. The timing makes no sense. It has to mean there is a puppeteer above the interim Chancellor that is calling the shots. Speculation is the BOT dictated the move, which may be the case. That also seems unusual based upon the recent history of the politics of the BOT and the state budget crisis UNLESS there was money pledged to pay the buyout. Could this be Shad Khan or some other Big Money Donor (BMD) exerting his influence through a friendly member of the BOT?
d. If there was money pledged to buy out the Thomas contract, wouldn't it be logical that the same BMD is also willing to put up money for the replacement? If that is the case, don't you think that BMD with the money has a short list of candidates to take the AD job? In fact, could there already be a handshake agreement to hire a new AD?
e. If there is a deal to hire a new AD, wouldn't it also make sense that there is also a deal to hire a new football coach? Otherwise, why would a BMD blow his wad on an AD but leave nothing for a football coach? Why would a BMD get so upset with Thomas that he would want him gone without also affecting the choice of coaches in the revenue sports, i.e. football and basketball?
Of course, the Thomas firing could be another monumentally stupid act by public officials in Illinois. But it certainly seems like something else is affecting these decisions.
a. I recall that Thomas base salary is/was $500k per year. If the customary duration of an AD contract is 5 years, that means that he got the FULL amount of the contract with NO offset. That is terrible negotiating by whomever fired Thomas.
b. If he is being paid for 60 months of a 60 month contract, the contract had to have been signed in the last 6 months. That means that the boss of Thomas in early summer thought there was a need to tie up Thomas in fear of losing him to another job. WHO was that person? Is that person in the same position today? If so, how do they justify reversing that decision today? This is such a supremely bad deal that collusion is one of the first thoughts. If not collusion, how did Thomas' standing reverse itself so drastically in 6 months?
c. Thomas was fired in November, weeks before the end of the football season with an interim coach, and by an interim Chancellor. The timing makes no sense. It has to mean there is a puppeteer above the interim Chancellor that is calling the shots. Speculation is the BOT dictated the move, which may be the case. That also seems unusual based upon the recent history of the politics of the BOT and the state budget crisis UNLESS there was money pledged to pay the buyout. Could this be Shad Khan or some other Big Money Donor (BMD) exerting his influence through a friendly member of the BOT?
d. If there was money pledged to buy out the Thomas contract, wouldn't it be logical that the same BMD is also willing to put up money for the replacement? If that is the case, don't you think that BMD with the money has a short list of candidates to take the AD job? In fact, could there already be a handshake agreement to hire a new AD?
e. If there is a deal to hire a new AD, wouldn't it also make sense that there is also a deal to hire a new football coach? Otherwise, why would a BMD blow his wad on an AD but leave nothing for a football coach? Why would a BMD get so upset with Thomas that he would want him gone without also affecting the choice of coaches in the revenue sports, i.e. football and basketball?
Of course, the Thomas firing could be another monumentally stupid act by public officials in Illinois. But it certainly seems like something else is affecting these decisions.
Last edited:
