Coordinator’s pay

[NewEnglandBull]

56 minutes ago, BDYZR said:

 

I've been saying this for a long time. All coaches contracts should be performance based.

It.Will.Never.Happen. 

[slowdown]

2 hours ago, BDYZR said:

 

I've been saying this for a long time. All coaches contracts should be performance based.

Sounds great. 

Until all the fully qualified, intelligent coaches take jobs at the schools who don't expect them to pay for all the aspects of the job they can't control.

[BDYZR]

5 minutes ago, slowdown said:

Sounds great. 

Until all the fully qualified, intelligent coaches take jobs at the schools who don't expect them to pay for all the aspects of the job they can't control.

How do coaches move up the coaching ladder now? Is it not performance based? Unfortunately it is based on past performance, aka xCCS, who obviously had no incentive to "earn" the contract he was given.

[slowdown]

18 minutes ago, BDYZR said:

How do coaches move up the coaching ladder now? Is it not performance based? Unfortunately it is based on past performance, aka xCCS, who obviously had no incentive to "earn" the contract he was given.

You're arguing why it's a good idea for the school.   

Its still a terrible deal for the coaches unless the incentive laden contracts far exceed the guaranteed money because there will always be another school that will offer the guaranteed money.  

[NewEnglandBull]

1 hour ago, BDYZR said:

How do coaches move up the coaching ladder now? Is it not performance based? Unfortunately it is based on past performance, aka xCCS, who obviously had no incentive to "earn" the contract he was given.

Would you not agree that is how most people get a contract when seeking a job...on ones historical success? I get what you are saying but the first university that does this puts its program at a significant disadvantage relative to the quality of the coach...or at the least is taking a risk with wins/loses. 

Edited January 26, 2020 by NewEnglandBull

[BDYZR]

38 minutes ago, slowdown said:

You're arguing why it's a good idea for the school.   

Its still a terrible deal for the coaches unless the incentive laden contracts far exceed the guaranteed money because there will always be another school that will offer the guaranteed money.  

Hence the reason for MY OPINION. I don't think, in the AAC, that a coach needs to have an extravagant guaranteed contract. They're all going to leave for that big money contract as soon as they prove that they can do the job, so why not make their contract more incentive laden? I know all the reasons it's not going to happen, same as the G5 and a National Championship.

[Bull Dozer]

At the very least it's a signal the administration is giving this staff time. Realistically we aren't fending off P5 schools if they want our coordinators so this is basically the school saying "we're giving you time to turn this around and we want stability". 

[BDYZR]

15 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Would you not agree that is how most people get a contract when seeking a job...on ones historical success? I get what you are saying but the first university that does this puts its program at a significant disadvantage relative to the quality of the coach...or at the least is taking a risk with wins/loses. 

Pretty much every successful company took a chance on a new idea. Some succeed, some fail. One thing for sure, it ain't gonna happen without trying.

[94 Bull]

Looks like some good incentives to win every game. 
 

[puc86]

I would prefer the bounties be on P5 programs and a significant one for NY6 a NY6 win significantly moves the needle and P5 wins get far more buts in stands than UCF wins ( if for no other reason than P5 games are at the start of the season while UCF the end). I really just don’t like the optics of exalting UCF above any other G5 program and I think it feeds their narrative.