From The Athletic…
“…(Jim Harbaugh) is said to be seeking written assurances that would prevent him from being fired if NCAA officials find him culpable of rules violations in ACTIVE INVESTIGATIONS…”
QUESTION ONE — Is Jim Harbaugh justified in seeking protection from unexpected penalties for violations that he did not personally commit that are inconsistent with NCAA and Big Ten penalty precedents?
Harbaugh suffered suspensions by both the Michigan AD and the Big Ten commissioner amounting to 6 of the 12 scheduled games in 2024 even though he has not been personally accused of violating any NCAA or Big Ten rules or policies or directing others to commit violations.
The NCAA has been pretty clear in its intent. They want to get rid of Jim Harbaugh. He’s been a loud proponent of sharing a sizable portion of TV revenues with the student-athletes who are featured on TV as well as sponsoring other unusual activities—satellite camps, team foreign travel, etc. The last thing the NCAA wants is a popular coach proposing anything that would reduce TV revenues. At the same time virtually all the Big Ten football coaches would like to get rid of Jim Harbaugh.
So does Harbaugh have reason to seek legal protection from unexpected, unjustified and unprecedented penalties? Without question, if I were his attorney I’d advise him YES.
But is he justified in demanding such protection for future violations not yet alleged or under investigation? NO.
QUESTION TWO — By acceding to Harbaugh’s demands, would Michigan be “selling its soul for athletic glory”.
Harbaugh is asking for protection from penalties by the AD, the Big Ten conference, and the NCAA for violations currently being investigated by the NCAA, either individually or if the NCAA chooses to group them together under a more serious category. The NCAA has refused to reach a negotiated settlement and appears to be grouping improper recruiting, improper coaching using Zoom and illegal advance scouting (sign stealing) under a Level 1 refusing to cooperate with an NCAA investigation allegation, probably for adjudication by the full Committee on Infractions.
Harbaugh has recent experience suggesting such protection is necessary. He can’t rely on his boss, the Athletic Director, the Big Ten Conference or the NCAA. So would Michigan’s agreement to Harbaugh’s demands for very narrow protections change the university’s institutional character? NO
QUESTION THREE — Should Michigan accede to Harbaugh’s demands in a contract extension?
The renegotiation of Harbaugh’s contract extension is now in It’s third year. Harbaugh is publicly in active discussions with a third and fourth NFL team regarding a head coaching opportunity. Michigan has proposed dramatic increases the amount of JH’s pay, the term of the contract, the pay pool for assistants, and almost all of his demands other than the protections against unexpected penalties from the NCAA, the Big Ten, or Warde Manuel?
Michigan has lost control of Harbaugh’s contract negotiation, is embarrassed by a popular and successful coach actively seeking an NFL job while still under contract, has lost important players and recruits who have transferred or de-committed. Even if agreement is reached this year, there is no assurance that Harbaugh’s dalliances with NFL teams won’t be repeated every year, regardless if Harbaugh says that he’s “willing to coach Michigan as long as they’ll have me.”
Michigan must regain control of this negotiation by giving Harbaugh a “take it or leave it” offer with a short time frame—the existing offer for a few days, not including his most recent demands. But Michigan should communicate to Harbaugh and his agent that if not signed in a few days the offer will be withdrawn and not considered again until the expiration of his contract at the end of the 2025 season. The AD should control increases in assistants pay. If that results in Harbaugh resigning, taking an NFL job or losing a few more recruits or transfers, so be it. Michigan must re-establish a proper employer-employee relationship with Jim Harbaugh.
So the question, should Michigan agree to accept Jim Harbaugh’s most recent contract demands or continue to negotiate them? NO
“…(Jim Harbaugh) is said to be seeking written assurances that would prevent him from being fired if NCAA officials find him culpable of rules violations in ACTIVE INVESTIGATIONS…”
QUESTION ONE — Is Jim Harbaugh justified in seeking protection from unexpected penalties for violations that he did not personally commit that are inconsistent with NCAA and Big Ten penalty precedents?
Harbaugh suffered suspensions by both the Michigan AD and the Big Ten commissioner amounting to 6 of the 12 scheduled games in 2024 even though he has not been personally accused of violating any NCAA or Big Ten rules or policies or directing others to commit violations.
The NCAA has been pretty clear in its intent. They want to get rid of Jim Harbaugh. He’s been a loud proponent of sharing a sizable portion of TV revenues with the student-athletes who are featured on TV as well as sponsoring other unusual activities—satellite camps, team foreign travel, etc. The last thing the NCAA wants is a popular coach proposing anything that would reduce TV revenues. At the same time virtually all the Big Ten football coaches would like to get rid of Jim Harbaugh.
So does Harbaugh have reason to seek legal protection from unexpected, unjustified and unprecedented penalties? Without question, if I were his attorney I’d advise him YES.
But is he justified in demanding such protection for future violations not yet alleged or under investigation? NO.
QUESTION TWO — By acceding to Harbaugh’s demands, would Michigan be “selling its soul for athletic glory”.
Harbaugh is asking for protection from penalties by the AD, the Big Ten conference, and the NCAA for violations currently being investigated by the NCAA, either individually or if the NCAA chooses to group them together under a more serious category. The NCAA has refused to reach a negotiated settlement and appears to be grouping improper recruiting, improper coaching using Zoom and illegal advance scouting (sign stealing) under a Level 1 refusing to cooperate with an NCAA investigation allegation, probably for adjudication by the full Committee on Infractions.
Harbaugh has recent experience suggesting such protection is necessary. He can’t rely on his boss, the Athletic Director, the Big Ten Conference or the NCAA. So would Michigan’s agreement to Harbaugh’s demands for very narrow protections change the university’s institutional character? NO
QUESTION THREE — Should Michigan accede to Harbaugh’s demands in a contract extension?
The renegotiation of Harbaugh’s contract extension is now in It’s third year. Harbaugh is publicly in active discussions with a third and fourth NFL team regarding a head coaching opportunity. Michigan has proposed dramatic increases the amount of JH’s pay, the term of the contract, the pay pool for assistants, and almost all of his demands other than the protections against unexpected penalties from the NCAA, the Big Ten, or Warde Manuel?
Michigan has lost control of Harbaugh’s contract negotiation, is embarrassed by a popular and successful coach actively seeking an NFL job while still under contract, has lost important players and recruits who have transferred or de-committed. Even if agreement is reached this year, there is no assurance that Harbaugh’s dalliances with NFL teams won’t be repeated every year, regardless if Harbaugh says that he’s “willing to coach Michigan as long as they’ll have me.”
Michigan must regain control of this negotiation by giving Harbaugh a “take it or leave it” offer with a short time frame—the existing offer for a few days, not including his most recent demands. But Michigan should communicate to Harbaugh and his agent that if not signed in a few days the offer will be withdrawn and not considered again until the expiration of his contract at the end of the 2025 season. The AD should control increases in assistants pay. If that results in Harbaugh resigning, taking an NFL job or losing a few more recruits or transfers, so be it. Michigan must re-establish a proper employer-employee relationship with Jim Harbaugh.
So the question, should Michigan agree to accept Jim Harbaugh’s most recent contract demands or continue to negotiate them? NO
Last edited:
