|
Post by bennyorange on Dec 12, 2017 15:37:19 GMT -8
Most, if not all, of our former assistants will find jobs and that will significantly mitigate the $2.65 million owed them in collective salary. Heaven help their future teams.....
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Dec 12, 2017 15:42:41 GMT -8
Thanks to Coach Smith coming in at an affordable level, the paper money shuffle works this year. ================================ I think his base pay doesn't change over the life of the contract. Money beyond that will come from hitting various incentives. Maybe we're splitting hairs here, but the pool for assistant coaches is roughly $700,000 or so more than last year. I would call that a significant amount, even having to pay one more full-time coach, not "small extra money." Most, if not all, of our former assistants will find jobs and that will significantly mitigate the $2.65 million owed them in collective salary. The way I look at it, on paper you're giving the "average assistant" a raise from 288,888.88 to 330K... but in reality there's no such thing as "average assistant" and we might have to pony up a couple hundred thousand each extra for our coordinators, maybe an extra 80-100K for certain other postions, and suddenly that money is gone. Right now everyone is comparing our next year's 3.3 million assistant salary pool against other school's salary pools from this year. Come August of next year when everyone's assistant coaches are set and articles come out about the coaching salaries at all of the schools in the league, our salary pool bump might not seem so big.
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Dec 12, 2017 16:42:59 GMT -8
This was not suppose to be a post about CGA and his record. Nor a post about whether JS salary is the right one. This was suppose to be a post about the amount of financial support OSU is putting into the program. I can not find the article/post that I read that showed that OSU had the lowest percent of spend for football as a percentage of the Athletic department. Once again a post is heading south. sighhhh bennyshouse.com/post/73965/threadThe way I read it you were lamenting the Beavs being last in the PAC in total football spending. I lament with you. You kind of lost my agreement though when you said the total was the same as last year, but the assistant pool was the same to spread over one additional coach. However, that doesn’t add up since JS makes $4-500k less than GA. Where does that go? To the assistants, more than enough to cover an additional lower level guy, with room left over to pay up for some heavy hitters, perhaps a DC? Anyway, that’s what I got out of it. And in the new board format, have a great day!
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Dec 12, 2017 17:02:18 GMT -8
The way I look at it, on paper you're giving the "average assistant" a raise from 288,888.88 to 330K... but in reality there's no such thing as "average assistant" and we might have to pony up a couple hundred thousand each extra for our coordinators, maybe an extra 80-100K for certain other postions, and suddenly that money is gone.
=========================
True. But with healthy raises. From $289K to $330k is a 15% bump, well above most industry standards. From $230k to $310K is almost a 40% raise.
More money is freed up as current assistants get jobs, which they will.
|
|
|
Post by whocares on Dec 12, 2017 17:30:35 GMT -8
More money is freed up as current assistants get jobs, which they will. What does the assistant coach at a middle school get paid anyway?
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Dec 12, 2017 17:35:38 GMT -8
More money is freed up as current assistants get jobs, which they will. What does the assistant coach at a middle school get paid anyway? Not sure. I was always the Head Coach taking in the dough.
|
|
|
Post by Tigardbeav on Dec 12, 2017 19:07:35 GMT -8
More money is freed up as current assistants get jobs, which they will. What does the assistant coach at a middle school get paid anyway? do they have to run the cookie raffle? Because that is the honey pot
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Dec 12, 2017 22:52:32 GMT -8
The way I look at it, on paper you're giving the "average assistant" a raise from 288,888.88 to 330K... but in reality there's no such thing as "average assistant" and we might have to pony up a couple hundred thousand each extra for our coordinators, maybe an extra 80-100K for certain other postions, and suddenly that money is gone. ========================= True. But with healthy raises. From $289K to $330k is a 15% bump, well above most industry standards. From $230k to $310K is almost a 40% raise. More money is freed up as current assistants get jobs, which they will. Sorry, but you are using averages in an industry that doesn't work on averages. Our DC made 450K this year. Grinch made 600K at WSU, UW's guy made 879K, uo's guy made 1.1 million. Our safeties coach made 200K this year. We want Heyward, who made 375 this season and is due for a big fat raise because he was scheduled to go to 400K at Cincinnatti in 2018 and Oregon's deal appears to have beaten the deal he had there. Our offensive coordinator made 375K this year. We just hired a guy that was scheduled to be paid 500K at Colorado in 2018. I'm assuming he's been promised at least a bit of a raise to disrupt his life and come here. I'd love to have Michael Johnson come over from uo. He made 275K this year while our recievers coach made 220K. And it goes on and on... that extra 700K is not going to go as far as some people think. Just in those 4 postions we've eaten up more than half of the money if we want to be anywhere close to competitive with the competition. We had a few guys making just 200K (plus 4 dollars officially for some reason) this year on staff, I'm not exactly sure how that compares but I'm pretty sure it is on the very low side in the league. Barnes made a big deal that Coach Smith would have the money to hire the coaches he wanted, he just left out the part "as long as they come cheap". That 3.3 mil looks good against 2017 salary pools, something like 6th or 7th in the league. But most schools are in the process of renegotiating this year or next, and replacing a few lost coaches as well. By the time it's all said and done we'll be paying in the bottom 2-4 in the league quite soon unless they continue to expand that pay pool. My biggest worry is being able to retain good help if the team has some success. I'm not sure what the current numbers are, but back in 2014 OSU had something like the 6th or 7th highest football income in the league but spent the 2nd lowest on the football program. With the hit we've taken in attendance and donations the last 3 years I do worry about the future unless Barnes and company really focus on football.
|
|
|
Post by zebraworks on Dec 13, 2017 8:21:06 GMT -8
does anyone know for sure the details on whether ANY of the previous staff had contracts that extended through 2018??
I think that makes a difference if they do have to be paid next season are you factoring that money into your calculations???
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Dec 13, 2017 8:41:41 GMT -8
He wanted to fire Baldwin completely, was stuck with him on staff, which meant he couldn't afford to go get another OC so he had to promote from within. Which was an improvement over Baldwin but still not a competent Pac-12 coordinator. Baldwin's offense in year one averaged more yards per game than the outfit we just saw put on the field this year. I'm still not convinced Baldwin was the problem. Additionally, Gary had every opportunity to let Dave Baldwin go at the end of the 2016 season when all of the original contracts signed by assistants expired, and he re-upped him for an additional two years, so I don't buy this idea that he wanted to fire him outright.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Dec 13, 2017 8:51:28 GMT -8
does anyone know for sure the details on whether ANY of the previous staff had contracts that extended through 2018?? I think that makes a difference if they do have to be paid next season are you factoring that money into your calculations Our entire staff was new enough that everyone was on the same contract schedule. Everyone was on their second two year contract. Most of those guys will be working elsewhere so that’ll mitigate a lot of that expense. That money is over and above the 3.3 million wage pool for this new group of assistants. I suspect there's some donors in the background or some office supplies/other expenses they’re not going to replace this year to help offset that.
|
|
|
Post by beaverjuice on Dec 13, 2017 9:42:16 GMT -8
He wanted to fire Baldwin completely, was stuck with him on staff, which meant he couldn't afford to go get another OC so he had to promote from within. Which was an improvement over Baldwin but still not a competent Pac-12 coordinator. Baldwin's offense in year one averaged more yards per game than the outfit we just saw put on the field this year. I'm still not convinced Baldwin was the problem. Additionally, Gary had every opportunity to let Dave Baldwin go at the end of the 2016 season when all of the original contracts signed by assistants expired, and he re-upped him for an additional two years, so I don't buy this idea that he wanted to fire him outright. It would have been interesting to see Baldwin's CSU offense put in place that first year, without gutting the roster of all our QB talent.
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Dec 13, 2017 9:50:06 GMT -8
Most, if not all, of our former assistants will find jobs and that will significantly mitigate the $2.65 million owed them in collective salary. Heaven help their future teams..... Or Wal-Marts.
|
|
|
Post by angrybeaver67 on Dec 13, 2017 10:11:16 GMT -8
Baldwin's offense in year one averaged more yards per game than the outfit we just saw put on the field this year. I'm still not convinced Baldwin was the problem. Additionally, Gary had every opportunity to let Dave Baldwin go at the end of the 2016 season when all of the original contracts signed by assistants expired, and he re-upped him for an additional two years, so I don't buy this idea that he wanted to fire him outright. It would have been interesting to see Baldwin's CSU offense put in place that first year, without gutting the roster of all our QB talent. I thought Baldwin was the reason we changed our offensive system to the extent the QBs that left were effectively shown the door...?
|
|
|
Post by nforkbeav on Dec 13, 2017 10:18:49 GMT -8
It would have been interesting to see Baldwin's CSU offense put in place that first year, without gutting the roster of all our QB talent. I thought Baldwin was the reason we changed our offensive system to the extent the QBs that left were effectively shown the door...? There have been so many rumors spread around, who knows for sure what really transpired outside the staff. Some have said Baldwin didn't want to change, also wanted to keep 3M, wasn't sold on GA's vision the first year based on the roster they inherited and butted heads over it. True? We may never know for sure.
|
|