Saturday, December 06, 2008
Who pays the coach, and what for?
Mark Yost looks at college football coaching salaries in today's WSJ, with an assist from a TSE post by Phil Miller. He also relays a nice quote from Ohio State legend Woody Hayes, summarizing the pay difference between him and a professor: "I can do your job, but you can't do mine."
In both college football and basketball, the ability to recruit, train, and strategize define the value in a top coach. But what about the NBA, where cash does your recruiting, the talent is already developed, and nobody takes the game seriously until the last half of the fourth quarter? As Craig Newmark notes, "more research is needed."
In both college football and basketball, the ability to recruit, train, and strategize define the value in a top coach. But what about the NBA, where cash does your recruiting, the talent is already developed, and nobody takes the game seriously until the last half of the fourth quarter? As Craig Newmark notes, "more research is needed."
Labels: coaching salaries
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Coaching buyouts
Tennessee's Phillip Fulmer received a contract extension last summer and is out of his job before all of the leaves have turned. Cost to Tennessee: $6 million.That's from Jon Solomon. Jon argues that Athletic Directors need to "find the discipline and political courage" to make a better bargain with their coaches. I think they buyouts are a form of deferred compensation, in part, and reflect long run marginal products. Bowden, Fulmer, and Tuberville all coached at their schools for a decade or more and each has had a significant measure of success. Not on the field in Clemson's case, but the program has never been as well stocked with talent and facilities, and Bowden is directly responsible for that. Bowden also had an explicit outside option -- the Arkansas job -- when his buyout was negotiated, and both Fulmer and Tuberville have significant earning potential elsewhere. Fulmer is reportedly interested in the Clemson opening, although the behavior of his players in recent years will be a liability with Clemson's administration.
Clemson's Tommy Bowden got an extension last December after flirting with Arkansas and was out of his job before Halloween. Cost to Clemson: $3.5 million.
Auburn's Tommy Tuberville agreed to an extension last November after his name was mentioned with the Texas A&M and Arkansas openings. Cost to Auburn, if it makes a change: $6 million.
Cases can be made for or against removing these coaches. When losing persists to the point that it divides a fan base - or even worse, making them apathetic - universities are obligated to consider pulling the plug.
What's staggering is how quickly they're pulling the plug after the group hug.
... Athletics directors used to speak publicly to show support in difficult times. But words soon turned into dreaded votes of confidence.
So contract extensions and automatic rollovers became the next tools to show recruits their coach would stick around. It was quickly understood that extensions are never worth the paper they're written on.
Then came buyouts. Coaches initially had the upper hand, getting paid handsomely if they were fired and owing nothing if they left. Athletics directors wised up and made buyouts a two-way street, but at the cost of skyrocketing buyout prices both ways.
The reality is buyouts don't work to keep a coach at a school if he really wants to leave. And they don't work to keep a school from firing a coach if it really wants him to leave.
The bottom line is that buyouts are a form of compensation that is market driven. I don't think they exist because Athletic Directors lack courage. The one policy change that would reduce their size would be to pay the players themselves, rather than the player-proxies that prowl the sidelines. But that ain't gonna happen folks.
Labels: coaching salaries, college football
Thursday, October 16, 2008
The Bowden Buyout
In the comments, J. A. requested a post on coaching buyouts in the wake of Tommy Bowden's departure at Clemson.** The fundamental point is that buyouts are not the key economic issue. They key issue is that coaches salaries, particularly in Tommy Bowden's case, are proxies for player talent. Bowden was paid $1.8 million per year in part because of his ability to stock the Tiger dressing room with loads of (largely uncompensated) talent.
The $3.5 million buyout is being paid out of a "rainy day" fund that has been built up specifically for this, or some similar purpose. The contract states that it will be paid out over six years, or about $600,000 per year. This is the right context: buyouts are a form of insurance in a high stakes game; tragedy triggers the "lump sum" buyout, but it is effectively an annual cost, part of the cost of doing business in major college football. Moreover, $600,000 is not a ton of money in today's college football world. And in the context of Bowden's salary and ten year's of coaching at Clemson, it's a decent reward for a pretty good job. Further, if Tommy takes another FBS job, I'd bet those payments will cease.
I'm not sure if he needs another job though, in the psychological sense, as the pressure clearly showed in his demeanor in recent years. Also, despite the severance in employment, his family has a good bit of orange blood in it now, as his two kids are Clemson alumni. He could stay put and be, as he put it on Monday, Clemson's #1 fan. One thing that is poorly understood is that Clemson fans deeply appreciate the work he has done to reconstruct the program, but the game day results over ten years were not good enough. Tommy was "building a Ferrari" but always had a missing part or two, and when the car crashed (repeatedly) it looked ugly.
The hullabaloo over Bowden's buyout, and indeed over mid-season departures is overdone. I find it hugely ironic that pundits who piled on the media pressure are now decrying the result. Pat Forde would be exhibit #1. Ironically, Tommy's father and brother, who one might expect to be bitter, are not. Indeed, Terry's column earlier this week hit the nail on the head.
**Disclaimer: this poster is employed by Clemson University and is a season ticket older. He expects a fired up team on Saturday against Georgia Tech. Go Tigers!
The $3.5 million buyout is being paid out of a "rainy day" fund that has been built up specifically for this, or some similar purpose. The contract states that it will be paid out over six years, or about $600,000 per year. This is the right context: buyouts are a form of insurance in a high stakes game; tragedy triggers the "lump sum" buyout, but it is effectively an annual cost, part of the cost of doing business in major college football. Moreover, $600,000 is not a ton of money in today's college football world. And in the context of Bowden's salary and ten year's of coaching at Clemson, it's a decent reward for a pretty good job. Further, if Tommy takes another FBS job, I'd bet those payments will cease.
I'm not sure if he needs another job though, in the psychological sense, as the pressure clearly showed in his demeanor in recent years. Also, despite the severance in employment, his family has a good bit of orange blood in it now, as his two kids are Clemson alumni. He could stay put and be, as he put it on Monday, Clemson's #1 fan. One thing that is poorly understood is that Clemson fans deeply appreciate the work he has done to reconstruct the program, but the game day results over ten years were not good enough. Tommy was "building a Ferrari" but always had a missing part or two, and when the car crashed (repeatedly) it looked ugly.
The hullabaloo over Bowden's buyout, and indeed over mid-season departures is overdone. I find it hugely ironic that pundits who piled on the media pressure are now decrying the result. Pat Forde would be exhibit #1. Ironically, Tommy's father and brother, who one might expect to be bitter, are not. Indeed, Terry's column earlier this week hit the nail on the head.
**Disclaimer: this poster is employed by Clemson University and is a season ticket older. He expects a fired up team on Saturday against Georgia Tech. Go Tigers!
Labels: coaching salaries, college football
Thursday, August 21, 2008
"The Bob Stoops Economy"
Exhibit 1 in "Why College Football Coaches are Paid so Much Money." This is the fifth story in a ten part, all you can eat, series on Stoops at the Oklahoman.
If you are interested in what the chairman of the board directors of the NCAA has to say about NCAA policy & potential reform, check out this Q&A from The State's Paul Strelow. As Jim Barker is my boss as president of Clemson University, I'd be a fool to throw smack at him in a blog, but trust me, he's a serious man who takes bold initiatives and knows how to get things done. Particularly notable is his comment on "the price of admission" to Division I athletics and academic accountability.
If you are interested in what the chairman of the board directors of the NCAA has to say about NCAA policy & potential reform, check out this Q&A from The State's Paul Strelow. As Jim Barker is my boss as president of Clemson University, I'd be a fool to throw smack at him in a blog, but trust me, he's a serious man who takes bold initiatives and knows how to get things done. Particularly notable is his comment on "the price of admission" to Division I athletics and academic accountability.
Labels: coaching salaries, college football, NCAA
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Coaches vs. Governors: Coaches in a Landslide!
The Kansas City Star has compiled a list of each state's governor's salary and the highest paid head coaches in that state. The coaches win 49-1 with Alaska being the only state where the coach is not paid more than the governor.
Labels: coaching salaries, college sports
