Well apparently mac knew for a while that leavitt was leaving but it seems like Clark is waiting for him to get back and tell him face to face.maybe like mfjl he hasn't told HCMM yet?
Just don't **** the dog on this
Something like that lol.Is this a saying people use??
I'm assuming this is tied to the next DC hire. If it's Tumpkin, then you can make a counter offer and try to keep Clark. If it's not Tumpkin, then you need to know what the new DC's staffing plan is before you make that offer to Clark?So a bidding war for Charles Clark? Really?
Some say screw the pooch...but the sentiment is the same.Is this a saying people use??
Very few programs can or are willing to compete with the likes of Oregon for paying coaches. CU is pretty solid as far as salaries go. Are we where we need to be? Probably not. But I think we'll increase our salary pool and be pretty competitive.
I'm assuming this is tied to the next DC hire. If it's Tumpkin, then you can make a counter offer and try to keep Clark. If it's not Tumpkin, then you need to know what the new DC's staffing plan is before you make that offer to Clark?
I should have explained myself better, sorry.
According to the reference below, we are about 1.1 million short annually of what assistant pay is for the #20 school on the list and about 2 Million short of the #20 school on the list for head coaches annually. The higher up the top 20 we go the farther back we are of course. We sit at number 43 and 55 respectively. Not every school high on the list is going to end up in the top 20 this year, but the vast majority are and most of them are perennial top 20 programs.
And this is my point - if we want to become a perennial top 20 program then we are going to have to be competitive in what we pay both head coach and staff if we want to avoid getting raided constantly by other schools. A little old fashioned here but I feel stability means a lot, especially when you are rebuilding.
So you are right we have some work to do but I am not quite so convinced that we are solid in the salary department. It looks to me like we are generally paying like a 45th ranked school for the most part, about 25 off from where we want to be.
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/
I think that is right as well.I also think it has something to do about being a State employee here in CO too that's a deterant here.
I think it's a constitutional issue...TABOR.Is there not one person in the state legislature that can introduce a bill to fix this one year crap for coaches at state schools or does it just not work that way here? I've been gone for 20 years.
But it can't be amended via a bill or would it have to be a state wide vote?I think it's a constitutional issue...TABOR.
Good question because many of the top 20 in head and assistant coach salaries are SEC schools not historically known to be located in the riches states in the union. Somehow they find the dough and the State is ok with throwing it at state university football salaries.But it can't be amended via a bill or would it have to be a state wide vote?
Is there not one person in the state legislature that can introduce a bill to fix this one year crap for coaches at state schools or does it just not work that way here? I've been gone for 20 years.
I think it's a constitutional issue...TABOR.
Sounds like you might have Title IX issues if you're carving out football expenses from the University.It does tie back into TABOR.
It has to do with the state not being able to tie itself to future financial obligation.
What I have wondered is if it would be possible to create a separate foundation that "employ" coaches and other key persons contingent on their continued employment by the university. Donations that would normally go into the AD would go to the foundation which would pay the coaches for a number of personal appearances, luncheons with the donors, etc.
If this happened the portion of their salaries paid by the university would still not be guaranteed but they could receive long term guarantees from the foundation.
It would require legislation to would provide for state oversight of the foundation and state that the "employment" is not a conflict of interest or other violation of state employment.
Comparing CU and the state of Colorado with schools and states in the south, for example, is not apples to apples. Colorado is largely populated with people who aren't from Colorado and their allegiances are elsewhere. Compare that to Alabama where I'd guess nearly all the population is from there, many generations over. I think that's why it's so difficult to garner support for higher ed in general in the state of Colorado.Good question because many of the top 20 in head and assistant coach salaries are SEC schools not historically known to be located in the riches states in the union. Somehow they find the dough and the State is ok with throwing it at state university football salaries.
Sounds like you might have Title IX issues if you're carving out football expenses from the University.