I’ve already left Morgantown as you read this so I can stay ahead of the weather that’s planning to run through the route I’ll take to Louisville. And since I’ll be in town earlier than normal and not back in time Thursday for the regularly scheduled chat, let’s do it tomorrow at 1 p.m.

Here’s your link for the chat and to put questions in the queue ahead of time. You can also ask in the comments here.

Lots and lots to talk about, including contracts, suspensions, walk-offs, incentives, ethics and Coaching Contracts 101, which I’ll be teaching in summer school to supplement my income. Why not? Everyone else is.

And if that wasn’t enough, chew on what I assume is a not-at-all-sufficient explanation, but the explanation nonetheless, for why WVU didn’t just go ahead and fire Bill Stewart.

Why bring him back and pay him nicely when he could be let go without owing him anything?

In short, the ending has been written. It just needs to be acted out by the characters involved.

The shortest, simplest answer is one that probably won’t satisfy most people: You just don’t do that to people. WVU didn’t want to do it to Stewart.

The explanation isn’t sufficient, but the question isn’t really relevant, either. People are too worried about the problem. Focus on the solution.

Coaching changes are often messy and WVU has a thick catalogue you can flip through for proof. What WVU has done is arrange things in fairly neat order. It has managed the variables.

There are definitive dates and dollar figures. There’s very little room for conjecture or disagreement. Signed documents seem to pack this up in a pretty little package. There will be no court battles, no ugliness, no pursuing money due or defending decisions to withhold money.