scott critics

[Outlaw]

Just now, Brad said:

Seems like the near costless extension is really getting under the skin....

If he is fired, we have to pay him more  money and more years.

[Brad]

5 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

If he is fired, we have to pay him more  money and more years.

 

Quote

Contract details

Scott took a pay cut in October 2020 because of the pandemic and the “budget shortfall” it created. Beginning that month, his salary dropped by about $70,000 total for the final three months of 2020 and $180,000 over the first half of 2021. He also agreed to forgo any bonuses.

In his latest deal — signed Dec. 16 — Scott took what amounted to a $100,000 pay cut for each of the next three seasons compared to the original contract. He’s set to make $2.4 million this calendar year with a $100,000 raise in ‘23 and ‘24. His salary stays at $2.7 million in ‘25 and ‘26.

USF agreed to spend an extra $100,000 on assistant coaches and support staff compared to the original deal. For 2022, that figure is $3.7 million.

The amended contract does not include a change to his buyout, if he’s fired without cause. His original deal calls for him to receive his base salary ($500,000) for 20 weeks from USF. It does not include any potential compensation from the USF Foundation; Scott’s successor, Charlie Strong, was owed $3.1 million when he was fired in 2019.

 

Link

[puc86]

19 minutes ago, Brad said:

 

 

Link

Did you completely skip the last and most important sentence? CCS’ deal was almost exactly worded and that practically free buyout turned out to be $3.1 million nothings.

[Brad]

5 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Did you completely skip the last and most important sentence? CCS’ deal was almost exactly worded

Where did you see that?  All it says was Chuck got paid from the Foundation.  It says nothing about Scott.  You took the bait, maybe?

[DELdaBull]

At this point why should Scott have anything BUT critics?

Let's hope 2022 is much much better than his first two years. 

[puc86]

12 minutes ago, Brad said:

Where did you see that?  All it says was Chuck got paid from the Foundation.  It says nothing about Scott.  You took the bait, maybe?

The way I remember the CCS contract information unfolding is that the 20 weeks is the legal cap for state employees as such there is now always a separate foundation contract where the rest of the punitive damage is housed and is not available from sunshine laws. If there is reason to believe CJS does not have a second contract I think the evidence of that needs to be presented because it is the deviation from the newly established normal. Leading up to the ccs termination people said we couldn’t afford it, then the contract came out and everyone was like why did we think we couldn’t do this? And then the real penalty came out when it was time to pay the piper.

[Brad]

Yes, the CCS deal was an outlier.  I doubt we continue with efforts like those under the former AD.  You can assume so, but certainly don't assert it as being a factual statement made by the reporter and I somehow "purposely" skipped it.

[puc86]

2 minutes ago, Brad said:

Yes, the CCS deal was an outlier.  I doubt we continue with efforts like those under the former AD.  You can assume so, but certainly don't assert it as being a factual statement made by the reporter and I somehow "purposely" skipped it.

Hopefully we don’t have to find out but I think it is pretty common knowledge now that our contracts for money sports come in tandems, you would think with all of the no change reporting someone in the room would bother to ask if there are any separate contracts beyond what’s publicly available just to see how they react. If CJS is really a 20 week buyout VPMK is the greatest contract negotiator in the college realm and I apologize for everything I’ve ever said about him, conversely CJS and his team are worse at negotiating college football head coaching deals than they are at college football.  It’s impossible that this is his buyout, it would be unconscionable in comparison to every other d1 coach and his counsel would be sued.

[Peatearpan]

Honestly, after this season and UCF et al leave, there is no reason we shouldn’t be winning this conference every season.

[Friscobull]

26 minutes ago, Peatearpan said:

Honestly, after this season and UCF et al leave, there is no reason we shouldn’t be winning this conference every season.

One main reason is we suck and can’t beat anybody as of late, why in the world do you think we can beat the new bunch of scrubs coming in.  Hell we are Tulane’s *****.