VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 12345678910 ]
Subject: Are you kidding???


Author:
Grin and Bear it
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 15:22:33 01/19/22 Wed

I just read that Mark Whipple, former Brown QB and coach, is being paid $875,000 as the offensive Coordinator at Nebraska. This kind of madness is destroying college sports. Where is it going to end? With that kind of money at stake, corruption is bound to follow. Sigh.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
[> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 16:45:22 01/19/22 Wed

That's nothing. The Defensive Coordinator at Texas A&M made more than 2 million last year...

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 17:45:06 01/19/22 Wed

It will be interesting to see whether some of these coaches' salaries moderate or even decline now that we have entered the NIL era. My supposition is that some of the booster money which paid for coaches will now go to the kids. Does that mean that the coaches will see diminished pay? Somehow, I doubt it.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Ghost of 1961
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 19:30:37 01/19/22 Wed

Actually, the opposite. The goal is to make your program more valuable/visible so your NIL deals will increase in value. How do you that? Shell out more $ to attract the best coaches so you have a better chance of winning.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Grin and Bear It
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 20:45:26 01/19/22 Wed

There is nothing collegial about big time college sports, and that is really very sad. Instead of being in the athletic department, they should be considered part of the development department. Over 60 years ago the Ivy League saw what was to come and took steps to prevent it. Unfortunately, even the IL has fallen prey to the madness of money. I am sure that Fidel Castro is having a good laugh as he watches Rome burn.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Not a surprise


Author:
sparman
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 22:43:35 01/19/22 Wed

These salaries for assistant coaches have been highlighted many times on this Board over the years.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
M3
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 07:24:12 01/20/22 Thu

Men’s college football and basketball generates huge revenues.

eg

https://www.ibj.com/articles/tv-rights-skyrocket

Who should be getting those monies?

Why not assistant coaches getting a piece of the pie?

Sean Gleason, ex Princeton OC, is making 1 million a year now being the OC for Rutgers.
Should he have negotiated for less money?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Some perspective
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 08:01:29 01/20/22 Thu

If you are good at your job and the job market for what you do pays 1 mil a year, take every penny. These coaches live on the edge every day, can be fired at any second, never see family and work 120 hours a week. We aren’t a socialist country yet, they deserve what the market is willing to pay.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Lurker
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 13:15:36 01/20/22 Thu

Sounds like everyone is on board with paying players then too - right. Players can get fired at any time too (just ask anyone about the fate of a freshman whose on-field performance doesnt live up to expectations, they are quickly encouraged to get themselves to that portal)

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Why Do We Root For Sports Teams? Seriously, Why Do We Even Do It?


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 12:33:49 01/20/22 Thu

Did you ever wonder why people root for sports teams? Seriously, why is that something that human beings do? We kind of take it for granted as normal because it's so universal.

I played sports as a younger person and loved most of them. But that does not explain why somebody would root for the Dallas Cowboys, whether they live in the metroplex area or not. I believe that most people root for sports teams because they have a hunger, a deep seated psychological need to achieve. Most people in normal jobs and normal careers do not have the opportunity to experience short-term, binary episodes of achievement or failure. Sure, over time, you hope to get better at your job and advance in your career. But that's a gradual process.

Sports allow us to experience episodic flights of self-esteem and self-worth when our favorite team wins. So it's important to us, very important.

Given all of that, is it any wonder that alumni of Texas A&M University can quickly raise half a billion dollars to renovate and expand Kyle Field? (By the way, it is absolutely stunning. If you're going to drop half a billion dollars, you should expect the Taj Mahal.)

Well, if you're willing to drop half a billion dollars to renovate and expand a building which will be used for its primary purpose on only six Saturdays per year, you're probably also willing to drop several tens of millions of dollars to increase the probability that you leave the stadium on those six Saturdays with a smile on your face.

I like to play poker. Where I play, about three-quarters of the higher stakes players are full-time poker players. This is what they do for a living. The remaining one-quarter are recreational players. The way that I see it, the full-time poker players supply their time in return for what they hope is an erratic, inconsistent stream of income. The recreational players supply their money in return for entertainment.

If you cancel the like commodity in both relationships (money), what's really happening in this ecosystem is that the full-time poker players supply their time to create entertainment for the recreational players.

But since there are three times as many full-time players as recreational players, the full-time players have to work harder and harder, spend more and more time at the table, to cobble together an income.

Similarly, most avid sports fans crave a sense of achievement which is important to their self-esteem. Jimbo Fisher creates for Texas A&M fans an erratic, inconsistent stream of that vicarious sense of achievement. So the fans are willing to pay money even though the return on investment is uncertain and sporadic.

Because there can only be a small number of champions compared to the total number of participating teams, the supporters of those teams, like the professional poker players, have to work harder and harder, spending more and more money, to generate what they hope is an inconsistent stream of vicarious achievement.

And that's why Jimbo Fisher makes $8 million a year.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Tiger81
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 13:13:02 01/20/22 Thu

I don't begrudge college football coaches from sharing in the riches from the P5 money machine. Those are hard, risky jobs and good coaches earn their salaries.

And it is also time for players to shares in those riches and reap the same rewards for being world-class athletes and entertainers.

To me the sad part is all of the role players (and the injured stars) who are so critical to the success of a college football team but who get only a scholarship for their efforts plus a lifetime of damage to their bodies and brains. Free market forces have been unleashed for coaches and now, thanks to NIL, healthy star players. Not so much for the other guys.

Unfortunately, the advent of NIL, the portal and free agency also means the part of college football I like best as a fan, which is the continuity and development of players and a team over a period of years, is now rapidly becoming a relic of the past for the P5. I think the impact on our beloved Ivy League will be minimal since at least right now institutional loyalty and commitment to academics is offsetting the glory of playing on a bigger stage for most of our student athletes.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Ghost of 1961
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 19:39:23 01/20/22 Thu

C'mon, Tiger. If the very best recruits in the Ivy League were offered scholarships to play in the ACC, you really think 'institutional loyalty' would come into play? I would think those moms and dads who've invested years of following their kids around to football camps, high school games, etc. would think differently about institutional loyalty. If you're a competitor, you want to play against the best.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Tiger81
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 20:55:47 01/20/22 Thu

Ghost - my point was that I don’t think the advent of the transfer portal will have a big impact on the league. Many of the “very best recruits” in the Ivies have already turned down P5 scholarships to attend their chosen school, presumably with the blessing of their moms and dads. It is not clear to me why they would now choose to transfer. I may not understand how a 19-year old thinks anymore, that is certainly possible, but that is my best guess.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Ghost of 1961
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 21:33:20 01/20/22 Thu

My bad, Tiger. I thought you were talking about kids coming out of HS with a P5 schollie (not a preferred walk-on). Yes, once you're locked in on a campus, trying to transfer 'up' is quite complicated.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Drew2411
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 21:21:14 01/20/22 Thu

Many? Seriously doubt many of the very best had commitable offers to power 5 schools, especially in football. Maybe Princeton, Harvard and Yale have a couple. But don’t confuse a kid saying he has an offer with a commitable offer. Rouse at Yale found that out.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Tiger81
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 07:48:53 01/21/22 Fri

Drew - Yes, seriously: Princeton has 21 commitments so far for 2022, of those 9 have P5 offers (some multiple P5 offers), assuming you believe the trackers at 247. 9/21 is a fair description of "many of the very best" recruits in the league.

You can't dismiss HYP as being unrepresentative because they attract a disproportionate number of the Ivy's elite recruits who might choose to enter the transfer portal. And my point was that I don't think many of them will pursue that option.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Ed
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:13:36 01/24/22 Mon

Tiger/Bengal/Drew - curious about your take on something. In the past 4-5 years, Princeton has loaded up on 3 star recruits with Multiple FBS offers. Same thing with Harvard and Yale. They significantly out-recruit Dartmouth. Yet Dartmouth has the best record in the league during past 5 seasons and they are repeat Ivy Champions. What is Dartmouth doing differently than HYP?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:24:22 01/24/22 Mon

I don't think it's even a matter of speculation. Dartmouth does a better job of developing players after they arrive on campus, as well as scheming and game planning to take maximum advantage of the talent they have.

Jimmy's and Joe's usually carry the day, but coaching plus X's and O's still count for something. Kudos to Buddy and his staff.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Bengal
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 16:19:06 01/24/22 Mon

I note the "stars" and all offers publicly mentioned but, while I do not discount them entirely, let alone compare them across teams, I am a moderate skeptic regarding them. How these star systems purport to rank stars among a million plus high school footballers leaves me a bit dubious.

As discussed on this board, not all "offers" are firm, and it is often very difficult based on what is published to tell which are real offers.

The people who have the best handle on the level of talent entering the League schools each year are the League coaches, IMO. They see a lot of recruits one way or another, whether they end up at their school or not. They also probably have a better sense of how players develop once in the League, with all the film watching and game planning they do.

So, I will take others' word who look at these metrics closely that Surace has more recruits with higher star ratings or Power 5-offered players or both than Teevens. Does he outrecruit Teevens for talent? Maybe, but I don't know and would prefer to get the views of Bagnoli, Reno, Priore et al. than whoever is doing the stars or reporting the offers.

In terms of developing players, Surace and his staff have done a great job and I don't doubt in the recent period of years so has Teevens.

Two things in your post are much more interesting to me. One is the bottomline. After his 2-20 start, which had some Tiger fans prepared to put him on or under the Dinky, he turned it around bigtime and has 4 titles in the last 8 years, starting in his fourth year. These are the best results since 1969 if not earlier. So, how many stars or Power 5 offers his recruits get vs. what another coach gets do not particularly mean too much to me.

The other is regarding Teevens II, how he turned around a 9-41 start complete with an 0-10 season in the middle, and even tacked on a sixth straight losing Ivy season. At least 6 of our schools would have fired him after year 5 or 6. This has also been discussed elsewhere, but I will start with crediting DC administrators for retaining him. Cheers.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: P.S.


Author:
Bengal
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 17:01:58 01/24/22 Mon

That should have read "or reported Power 5-offered players"

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: Are you kidding???


Author:
Tiger81
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:37:29 01/24/22 Mon

Ed - cannot argue with your premise, Dartmouth continues to put a very strong team on the field every year despite not having the same credentials on paper as HYP's teams. I can only speculate that Coach Teevens does a really good job of recruiting for development potential and the scheme and culture of his team and then the coaching staff follows through by preparing these recruits to succeed in their system.

Coach Surace also does a good job of elevating the performance of Princeton's young players and the Tigers probably have more depth on their roster. But as another poster likes to say, you can only play 11 at a time.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]


Login ] Create Account Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
* Message subject (required):

Name (required):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:


Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.