Guess which coach has the higher salary

[Sellular1]

We should offer the next coach a salary of $1 with no annual contract. Other compensation includes $350k per win.

Go 10-2 and make $3.5 million. Leave or be fired at any time. This way, we are only paying for success.

only problem with that scenario is if CWT was on that pay schedule, we'd owe him money with only 4 wins

That's true, but the position should also be more interesting to higher level/more desirable coaches that are looking for upside $$$

Maybe tweak it so the dollar value escalates with each win. Wins 1-4 pay $200k wins 5-7 pay $300k and 8+ pay $400k

Anyway, I guess we're just killing time till our next huge embarrassing failure on Friday.

Edited November 24, 2014 by Sellular1

[The Great 8]

 

 

We should offer the next coach a salary of $1 with no annual contract. Other compensation includes $350k per win.

Go 10-2 and make $3.5 million. Leave or be fired at any time. This way, we are only paying for success.

If this worked, programs would be doing it. Fact is, nobody would take this job.

That's a pretty bold statement. I don't know if it's true that nobody would be interested. In the business world, many CEO's have a $1 salary and all their compensation is tied to performance including Meg Whitman of H.P.

 

 

Many CEO's have a $1 salary? Complete and utter BS.

 

When you get to this stature of employment, certain guarantees and security are expected.

 

Nobody is going to take a job at a rock bottom program with no job security, or guarantees, that their families will be safe when/if they lose.

 

Suppose Taggart took the job with your parameters, and we fired him this year. He's essentially toxic waste and rebuilding his career. Without the benefit of severance.

 

I scoff at bonus laden job offers and I'm probably making 1/10th of Willie's salary.

[Sellular1]

We should offer the next coach a salary of $1 with no annual contract. Other compensation includes $350k per win.

Go 10-2 and make $3.5 million. Leave or be fired at any time. This way, we are only paying for success.

If this worked, programs would be doing it. Fact is, nobody would take this job.

That's a pretty bold statement. I don't know if it's true that nobody would be interested. In the business world, many CEO's have a $1 salary and all their compensation is tied to performance including Meg Whitman of H.P.

Many CEO's have a $1 salary? Complete and utter BS.

When you get to this stature of employment, certain guarantees and security are expected.

Nobody is going to take a job at a rock bottom program with no job security, or guarantees, that their families will be safe when/if they lose.

Suppose Taggart took the job with your parameters, and we fired him this year. He's essentially toxic waste and rebuilding his career. Without the benefit of severance.

I scoff at bonus laden job offers and I'm probably making 1/10th of Willie's salary.

Didn't mean to get you "scoffing" with facts. You must have a liberal arts degree

http://time.com/2979379/ceos-who-make-1

Edited November 24, 2014 by Sellular1

[2000bull]

 

 

 

 

We should offer the next coach a salary of $1 with no annual contract. Other compensation includes $350k per win.

Go 10-2 and make $3.5 million. Leave or be fired at any time. This way, we are only paying for success.

If this worked, programs would be doing it. Fact is, nobody would take this job.

That's a pretty bold statement. I don't know if it's true that nobody would be interested. In the business world, many CEO's have a $1 salary and all their compensation is tied to performance including Meg Whitman of H.P.

Many CEO's have a $1 salary? Complete and utter BS.

When you get to this stature of employment, certain guarantees and security are expected.

Nobody is going to take a job at a rock bottom program with no job security, or guarantees, that their families will be safe when/if they lose.

Suppose Taggart took the job with your parameters, and we fired him this year. He's essentially toxic waste and rebuilding his career. Without the benefit of severance.

I scoff at bonus laden job offers and I'm probably making 1/10th of Willie's salary.

Didn't mean to get you "scoffing" with facts. You must have a liberal arts degree

http://time.com/2979379/ceos-who-make-1/

 

that's funny...sometimes facts make people angry

[Who'sYourData?]

There is 0 chance that the Oregon head coach makes the same amount as Taggart. Might say that in that site but as 84 mentioned he's gotta make up for it somewhere else.

 

The Oregon coach is relatively new at his job.  He was promoted from Offensive Coordinator when Chip Kelly left.  He had no prior head coaching experience.  Even at Oregon that would not earn him a high salary.

[bullsfan1983]

 

 

 

 

We should offer the next coach a salary of $1 with no annual contract. Other compensation includes $350k per win.

Go 10-2 and make $3.5 million. Leave or be fired at any time. This way, we are only paying for success.

If this worked, programs would be doing it. Fact is, nobody would take this job.

That's a pretty bold statement. I don't know if it's true that nobody would be interested. In the business world, many CEO's have a $1 salary and all their compensation is tied to performance including Meg Whitman of H.P.

Many CEO's have a $1 salary? Complete and utter BS.

When you get to this stature of employment, certain guarantees and security are expected.

Nobody is going to take a job at a rock bottom program with no job security, or guarantees, that their families will be safe when/if they lose.

Suppose Taggart took the job with your parameters, and we fired him this year. He's essentially toxic waste and rebuilding his career. Without the benefit of severance.

I scoff at bonus laden job offers and I'm probably making 1/10th of Willie's salary.

Didn't mean to get you "scoffing" with facts. You must have a liberal arts degree

http://time.com/2979379/ceos-who-make-1/

So some billionaires that make money based on their stock options have a symbolic $1 salary because who cares about a couple 100K in salary when their net worth is 100000 times that amount. A big difference from asking a coach to come here with 0 guaranteed money. Maybe if you gave them a percentage based on revenue that the football program generates or something of that nature, but wins and losses would be a non-starter.

[Sellular1]

We should offer the next coach a salary of $1 with no annual contract. Other compensation includes $350k per win.

Go 10-2 and make $3.5 million. Leave or be fired at any time. This way, we are only paying for success.

If this worked, programs would be doing it. Fact is, nobody would take this job.

That's a pretty bold statement. I don't know if it's true that nobody would be interested. In the business world, many CEO's have a $1 salary and all their compensation is tied to performance including Meg Whitman of H.P.

Many CEO's have a $1 salary? Complete and utter BS.

When you get to this stature of employment, certain guarantees and security are expected.

Nobody is going to take a job at a rock bottom program with no job security, or guarantees, that their families will be safe when/if they lose.

Suppose Taggart took the job with your parameters, and we fired him this year. He's essentially toxic waste and rebuilding his career. Without the benefit of severance.

I scoff at bonus laden job offers and I'm probably making 1/10th of Willie's salary.

Didn't mean to get you "scoffing" with facts. You must have a liberal arts degree

http://time.com/2979379/ceos-who-make-1/]http://time.com/2979379/ceos-who-make-1/

So some billionaires that make money based on their stock options have a symbolic $1 salary because who cares about a couple 100K in salary when their net worth is 100000 times that amount. A big difference from asking a coach to come here with 0 guaranteed money. Maybe if you gave them a percentage based on revenue that the football program generates or something of that nature, but wins and losses would be a non-starter.

There are literally thousands of target compensation only types of jobs. If you sell something or deliver on a target, you get paid, if you don't... You don't get paid. Some people call that a challenge. Some believe in their abilities and are hugely successful.

BTW, not trying to be a douche. Just throwing out mostly stupid ideas on ways we don't get stuck paying fired coaches salaries in the future. Nothing personal amigo.

Edited November 24, 2014 by Sellular1

[bullsfan1983]

 

 

 

 

 

 

We should offer the next coach a salary of $1 with no annual contract. Other compensation includes $350k per win.

Go 10-2 and make $3.5 million. Leave or be fired at any time. This way, we are only paying for success.

If this worked, programs would be doing it. Fact is, nobody would take this job.

That's a pretty bold statement. I don't know if it's true that nobody would be interested. In the business world, many CEO's have a $1 salary and all their compensation is tied to performance including Meg Whitman of H.P.

Many CEO's have a $1 salary? Complete and utter BS.

When you get to this stature of employment, certain guarantees and security are expected.

Nobody is going to take a job at a rock bottom program with no job security, or guarantees, that their families will be safe when/if they lose.

Suppose Taggart took the job with your parameters, and we fired him this year. He's essentially toxic waste and rebuilding his career. Without the benefit of severance.

I scoff at bonus laden job offers and I'm probably making 1/10th of Willie's salary.

Didn't mean to get you "scoffing" with facts. You must have a liberal arts degree

http://time.com/2979379/ceos-who-make-1/]http://time.com/2979379/ceos-who-make-1/

So some billionaires that make money based on their stock options have a symbolic $1 salary because who cares about a couple 100K in salary when their net worth is 100000 times that amount. A big difference from asking a coach to come here with 0 guaranteed money. Maybe if you gave them a percentage based on revenue that the football program generates or something of that nature, but wins and losses would be a non-starter.

There are literally thousands of target compensation only types of jobs. If you sell something or deliver on a target, you get paid, if you don't... You don't get paid. Some people call that a challenge. Some believe in their abilities and are hugely successful.

BTW, not trying to be a douche. Just throwing out mostly stupid ideas on ways we don't get stuck paying fired coaches salaries in the future. Nothing personal amigo.

 

Sorry there aren't coaches at the college level who are willing to put in a years worth of work with $1 guaranteed compensation and potential to be fired after a single season. It won't happen. I'm not sure what a "target compensation only type" job is. I assume you are talking about sales jobs and no longer about the richest of the rich billionaire executives now. In those jobs there is still a minimum compensation that is above $1 based on minimum wage laws. There is incentive for better performance, but the bottom of the pay scale isn't $1. Even then with those jobs the results are more or less directly tied to your ability to perform and not the ability of 85+ student/athletes who weren't even your recruits.

[The Great 8]

 

 

 

 

We should offer the next coach a salary of $1 with no annual contract. Other compensation includes $350k per win.

Go 10-2 and make $3.5 million. Leave or be fired at any time. This way, we are only paying for success.

If this worked, programs would be doing it. Fact is, nobody would take this job.

That's a pretty bold statement. I don't know if it's true that nobody would be interested. In the business world, many CEO's have a $1 salary and all their compensation is tied to performance including Meg Whitman of H.P.

Many CEO's have a $1 salary? Complete and utter BS.

When you get to this stature of employment, certain guarantees and security are expected.

Nobody is going to take a job at a rock bottom program with no job security, or guarantees, that their families will be safe when/if they lose.

Suppose Taggart took the job with your parameters, and we fired him this year. He's essentially toxic waste and rebuilding his career. Without the benefit of severance.

I scoff at bonus laden job offers and I'm probably making 1/10th of Willie's salary.

Didn't mean to get you "scoffing" with facts. You must have a liberal arts degree

http://time.com/2979379/ceos-who-make-1

 

 

1. Actually, I'm an engineering major making well into 6-figures in his 20's.

2. Oh boy, 25 CEO's who make $1. It's a good thing that represents about 0.00000001% of the world's CEO's.

 

Just as you later respond to bullsfan1983 with, you're idea is a (mostly) stupid idea. Why are you attacking me?

 

Do you really think you're so novel as to have been the only one to emerge with this idea? Maybe if you ever get beyond $8/hr at McDonald's (UCF degree?) you'll realize how the world of 7+ figure contracts generally work. By and large, it's not head men and women taking over failing companies and taking no guaranteed money doing it. Willie took some risk trying to take over our dumpster fire, the market has set the floor of the expected prices. He's not getting some inordinate amount of money. If our AD had a larger budget, or we weren't already floating 2 other coaches, firing him - salary wise - would be a non issue.

Edited November 24, 2014 by The Great 8

[Sellular1]

We should offer the next coach a salary of $1 with no annual contract. Other compensation includes $350k per win.

Go 10-2 and make $3.5 million. Leave or be fired at any time. This way, we are only paying for success.

If this worked, programs would be doing it. Fact is, nobody would take this job.

That's a pretty bold statement. I don't know if it's true that nobody would be interested. In the business world, many CEO's have a $1 salary and all their compensation is tied to performance including Meg Whitman of H.P.

Many CEO's have a $1 salary? Complete and utter BS.

When you get to this stature of employment, certain guarantees and security are expected.

Nobody is going to take a job at a rock bottom program with no job security, or guarantees, that their families will be safe when/if they lose.

Suppose Taggart took the job with your parameters, and we fired him this year. He's essentially toxic waste and rebuilding his career. Without the benefit of severance.

I scoff at bonus laden job offers and I'm probably making 1/10th of Willie's salary.

Didn't mean to get you "scoffing" with facts. You must have a liberal arts degreehttp://time.com/2979379/ceos-who-make-1

 

1. Actually, I'm an engineering major making well into 6-figures in his 20's.

2. Oh boy, 25 CEO's who make $1. It's a good thing that represents about 0.00000001% of the world's CEO's.

 

Just as you later respond to bullsfan1983 with, you're idea is a (mostly) stupid idea. Why are you attacking me?

 

Do you really think you're so novel as to have been the only one to emerge with this idea? Maybe if you ever get beyond $8/hr at McDonald's (UCF degree?) you'll realize how the world of 7+ figure contracts generally work. By and large, it's not head men and women taking over failing companies and taking no guaranteed money doing it. Willie took some risk trying to take over our dumpster fire, the market has set the floor of the expected prices. He's not getting some inordinate amount of money. If our AD had a larger budget, or we weren't already floating 2 other coaches, firing him - salary wise - would be a non issue.

I thought it was you I was responding to about not trying to be a douche. Sorry.