New DC Poll-Top 4 candidates

[cubuffs11]

Out of all the confusing and pointless arguments, this is right at the top. Honestly haven't a clue what the hell is going on itt

From phone

Slider: HCMM needs to be lynched.
Tini: HCMM needs to be canonized.

Game. Set. Match.

 

[SuperiorBuff]

If we're paying any DC 700k+ than we should expect at a minimum a top 50 defense in year 1

:stupid: I agree.

 

[ahoelsken]

Interesting. Not sure why either would do that though?

I don't think that happens-Durkin has had at least two other coordinator offers.......and I think we all assume he's got at least offer on the table from us. Harbaugh keeping Mattison isn't shocking--He's got ties to the Harbaugh family. Not only that, but his previous employer before he went to Michigan was the Baltimore Ravens. I'd guess he stays as a position coach.

 

[boydbuff]

Not surprising, nor that important, but sources confirm that D Gibbs was a candidate for the UNC job as well. The main relevance of this is that D Gibbs seems to be one of the top candidates for DC this year as he has at least had interest from UNC, TT and CU that I know of.

http://northcarolina.scout.com/story/1497944-chizik-to-lead-unc-s-defense?s=78

 

[buffaholic]

Big game this morning for us as the Univ of Houston takes on someone else at 10am Mountain time on ESPN. I think this is our new DC (no inside info) - I've eliminated Pendergast as that announcement would have been quicker.

 

[WizzersGhost]

Big game this morning for us as the Univ of Houston takes on someone else at 10am Mountain time on ESPN. I think this is our new DC (no inside info) - I've eliminated Pendergast as that announcement would have been quicker.

Sounds about right. My concern with Pendergast is his Steve Marshall-like wanderlust. No wife/family, thus no anchor.

 

[DBT]

No way

So, you believe we will pay a DC $750K to $1 million but not give any other raises?

 

[patebuff]

Big game this morning for us as the Univ of Houston takes on someone else at 10am Mountain time on ESPN. I think this is our new DC (no inside info) - I've eliminated Pendergast as that announcement would have been quicker.

Agreed. Formalities

 

[Highlander]

So, you believe we will pay a DC $750K to $1 million but not give any other raises?

Yes

Someone else used the example, but just because my peer gets a raise, it doesn't mean I get one. Last I checked, America was not a communist regime, no matter what the zero has tried to do.

You get paid based on your market performance, along with supply and demand.

 

[DBT]

Yes

Someone else used the example, but just because my peer gets a raise, it doesn't mean I get one. Last I checked, America was not a communist regime, no matter what the zero has tried to do.

You get paid based on your market performance, along with supply and demand.

I don't believe the staff coaches would get nor do the deserve to get raises. I do believe if the DC gets a big salary, Lindgren would be in line for an increase. I believe Mac would not expect a raise until he turns this around. So, if we bring in a DC at $750K, a $300K increase, RG will have to come up with an extra $500K minimum.

 

[Quattro]

So, you believe we will pay a DC $750K to $1 million but not give any other raises?

When did we switch to communism?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Gary Indiana]

Big game this morning for us as the Univ of Houston takes on someone else at 10am Mountain time on ESPN. I think this is our new DC (no inside info) - I've eliminated Pendergast as that announcement would have been quicker.

You could say the same for Durkin who is coaching a bowl game tomorrow.

 

[DBT]

When did we switch to communism?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

You have it wrong. It's pure capitalism. It's called working with a budget.

 

[BuffsNYC]

When did we switch to communism?

I thought you graduated? Maybe you can get some polisci courses at the learning annex.

 

[DBT]

Houston D getting accolades. Shot of Gibbs on the sideline. But Pitt with a big pass and now a couple of big runs.

 

[Quattro]

You have it wrong. It's pure capitalism. It's called working with a budget.

It's kind of the basis though, you're advocating for everyone to get a raise, or a couple people, because someone who is being hired with a higher salary without regard for the performance of others.

I'm not saying it's communism, but it is along the same lines.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[patebuff]

You could say the same for Durkin who is coaching a bowl game tomorrow.

I think a lot of the dominoes start falling after today's games.

 

[cubuf]

Well Houston defense just let up a TD. So time to find a new dc :haha2:

 

[buffs04]

It's kind of the basis though, you're advocating for everyone to get a raise, or a couple people, because someone who is being hired with a higher salary without regard for the performance of others.

I'm not saying it's communism, but it is along the same lines.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

You do a lot of posturing about your knowledge of "economics" for someone who doesn't understand that markets set prices and that CU doesn't need to give Lindgren a raise right now because prices for already-purchased goods don't continuously update in real time on the basis of some obscure measures of "performance". If the market equilibrium were that all coaches contracts were updated after every year on the sole basis of the performance criteria that you've selected, then yes, we would need to give Lindgren a raise. Because that isn't the case, and contracts are only adjusted after highly-visible strong performances or once every few years when the structure of the contract dictates that it's time to return to the negotiating table, we don't.

It is typical for high-performers in the sports industry to be "underpaid" relative to performance in the early years of their career because the market doesn't have very much information about their true skill level and so the variance of their future expected performance is very high compared to established coaches. Putting in a few years at relatively-low compensation before getting a large contract is how coaches establish value. One year being the OC for a team that went winless in conference is not a predicate for a gold rush from other teams.

 

[buffaholic]

You could say the same for Durkin who is coaching a bowl game tomorrow.

Yeah - but I guess I've never believed that was going to happen.

 

[tante]

It's kind of the basis though, you're advocating for everyone to get a raise, or a couple people, because someone who is being hired with a higher salary without regard for the performance of others.

I'm not saying it's communism, but it is along the same lines.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

You are going to learn a hard lesson when you start working. Quick lesson: Raises pools always suck. The raise difference between a top review and a bottom review could be less than $1000 a year. The best way to get a raise can be to change jobs (and companies).

 

[Mr. Babar]

It's kind of the basis though, you're advocating for everyone to get a raise, or a couple people, because someone who is being hired with a higher salary without regard for the performance of others.

I'm not saying it's communism, but it is along the same lines.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

If it was communist the coaches would all earn the same wage, RG would dictate how many run plays and pass plays they could run, and dissenters would be banished to the gulag in Ft Collins.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dark Bohner]

You are going to learn a hard lesson when you start working. Quick lesson: Raises pools always suck. The raise difference between a top review and a bottom review could be less than $1000 a year. The best way to get a raise can be to change jobs (and companies).

Yep. More often than not new workers that are hired at a company with the same job title as current workers are making more than the current workers due to the competitive pay rate in the field. Best way to make more is to do job churn. It can be riskier though.

 

[ahoelsken]

I don't believe the staff coaches would get nor do the deserve to get raises. I do believe if the DC gets a big salary, Lindgren would be in line for an increase. I believe Mac would not expect a raise until he turns this around. So, if we bring in a DC at $750K, a $300K increase, RG will have to come up with an extra $500K minimum.

We need to give Lindgren a raise because? The only way I think you could justify this would be if BL had somebody interested in hiring him away......and thats not happening. Whatever money RG has come up with needs to be spent on the new DC, La Russa's replacement, and replacing the two remaining defensive coaches ifneedbe (Again, I assume that the new DC will have the latitude to replace Jeffcoat and/or Charles Clark if they see fit to do so).

 

[buff4bcs1985]

now can we please get the **** back on point

 

[Undefeated]

As others have already stated, isn't it a foregone conclusion that our top choice/s for DC is/are currently coaching in a bowl game either today or tomorrow? Either that, or we're waiting on said top choice/s to say no, so we can move on to our 2nd or 3rd option?

Frustrating to see all this coaching movement at big time programs and have our DC position vacated for ~2 weeks now. Again, shows you where CU ranks the pecking order...

 

[Duff Man]

Two weeks during a dead period means very little.

 

[BlackNGold]

I think the coaches that CU may be interested in are also looking at other opportunities. CU is a high risk situation for a coach coming into the position.

 

[CUFan]

I don't care what we pay these guys so long as they are good. Do I think Lindgren earned a raise? No. But if he's our best option and he needs a raise to stay, then give it to him. We're talking about paying a DC big boy money, and as of now, none want to take it. We may need to overpay. Fine with me so long as we get a good DC and this team does much better next year.

The AD knows how desperate the situation is at CU. I suspect RG will do all he can to upgrade coaching talent, including spending a lot of coin.

 

[Quattro]

You do a lot of posturing about your knowledge of "economics" for someone who doesn't understand that markets set prices and that CU doesn't need to give Lindgren a raise right now because prices for already-purchased goods don't continuously update in real time on the basis of some obscure measures of "performance". If the market equilibrium were that all coaches contracts were updated after every year on the sole basis of the performance criteria that you've selected, then yes, we would need to give Lindgren a raise. Because that isn't the case, and contracts are only adjusted after highly-visible strong performances or once every few years when the structure of the contract dictates that it's time to return to the negotiating table, we don't.

It is typical for high-performers in the sports industry to be "underpaid" relative to performance in the early years of their career because the market doesn't have very much information about their true skill level and so the variance of their future expected performance is very high compared to established coaches. Putting in a few years at relatively-low compensation before getting a large contract is how coaches establish value. One year being the OC for a team that went winless in conference is not a predicate for a gold rush from other teams.

Wait, the market sets the price? You don't say? I guess I should have looked at the market for offensive coordinators in the Pac 12 and compared..wait I did. What is your criteria for pay? Years at position? Points per game? Efficiency? All I am saying is that Lindgren should be compensated right at the average wage in the Pac 12 for his performance. Coaches every year in every sport receive raises for their performance. Lindgren cannot do anything about the defense giving up almost 40ppg, but his offense carried their weight and then some by putting the team in a position to win the game.

You are going to learn a hard lesson when you start working. Quick lesson: Raises pools always suck. The raise difference between a top review and a bottom review could be less than $1000 a year. The best way to get a raise can be to change jobs (and companies).

I guess the point I am making is that if someone else I work with gets a raise I don't expect to get one unless we worked on the same project or something.

If it was communist the coaches would all earn the same wage, RG would dictate how many run plays and pass plays they could run, and dissenters would be banished to the gulag in Ft Collins.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand what communism is and the theory behind it. While not the exact same thing, DBT is kind of preaching commy principles by saying that everyone should get a raise if we hire Gibbs and pay him more than the other staff members just because.