You are looking live at the buyout liquidated damages provisions proposed for University of Arizona football coach Rich Rodriguez’s soon-to-be extended contract.

The Wildcats are trying to extend Rodriguez, men’s basketball coach Sean Miller and athletic director Greg Byrne, and, to be frank, they’ve come up with a whale of a way to do it. (Aside: Somewhere, coal people who support WVU had to start spinning a similar idea in their heads, right?) The plan became public yesterday within state board of regents documents and should be approved next week. Until then, no comment from anyone in blue and red — believe me, I tried.

Why did I try? Are you new here? This is like the Holy Trinity of WVU fan fears and interests: The Product, coaching contracts and hot seats!

Hopefully I don’t have to tell you there are arms here that will open to embrace Rodriguez. And that buyouts and contracts and even screw-ups (See: University of West Virginia; See also: Failure to procure a coach’s signature on a contract. Twice.) are things we’ve come to know pretty well. And that in the eyes of so, so many Dana Holgorsen faces essentially a must-win season this fall.

So, yeah, that section, likely insisted on by Arizona and agreed to by Team Rodriguez, garnered some attention.

Like, a lot of attention.

What does it mean? Well, we have to put words in the mouths of others, which is never my thing, but I think we can do it and be (mostly) accurate here. It means Arizona knows the score, that Arizona knows Rodriguez has started to make inroads with the country roads again, if even in goodwill, time-heals-all-wounds gestures, that Arizona knows a coaching change here might elicit a phone call to the 520.

So Arizona, which has had a pretty nice uptick with Rodriguez, protected its investment. Either put a barrier before the exit or generate a reward upon exit. No-brainer.

But Arizona also did something weird that might become an issue — and I do not mean referencing the University of West Virginia. That’s worth a chuckle and little more. The fact WVU was included, or in this case referenced, is a matter of principle that will stand against any challenge. And I have to think that’ll be amended and presented properly in a formal and final version.

But more importantly, Arizona set the general price for buying out of the contract at different times at $1 million and $500,000. That means if Rodriguez leaves, Arizona expects to be damaged in a way that can best be appeased by $1 million/$500,000. That’s common, but before you say it’s not very big, remember Rodriguez had to pay WVU $4 million not too long ago.

Then Arizona says it would be twice as painful and require a fix twice as big if Rodriguez left for WVU. This is the weird part that might become an issue.

Why? That seems punitive to me, and without getting out of our comfort zone here, punitive clauses are penalties. Contracts are not supposed to penalize a party or deter a party from breaching. It seems like Rodriguez would be punished for leaving for WVU because the price doubles. That’s a deterrent and it’s generally frowned upon in contract law.

If this were to ever become litigious, that’s an avenue Team Rodriguez would surely inspect, and I have a hard time believing Arizona could win that argument. How is leaving for 123 schools worth one fee and leaving for one school worth a fee twice as large?

And it would probably be settled, say for a fee in the middle, and that’s that.

Then there’s the matter of what this means back here, and let’s not pretend that it’s without meaning or that it wasn’t burning up texts and cell phones last night and this morning. This is a thing now and it sets a price for doing business.

Would it keep WVU or its benefactors from doing what it wants to do? I doubt it, which is what makes it a shrewd move by Arizona, but it’s out there now and the inclusion becomes a part of the story line, not just because this is the summer and mole hills become mountains, but because of the situation being what it is as the 2014 football season begins.