Martin wants an extension and am sure a raise (rumor)

[Velo Vol]

"There's been more than a little chatter this week about Cuonzo Martin and his contract, particularly as it relates his seeking an extension and a raise. We'd like to point out that nowhere has the Vols' head coach been cited as a source, and certainly not quoted, as being unhappy with his contract. In fact, from what we understand, from sources we'd describe as very close to the situation, Martin isn't unhappy with his deal and hasn't approached Dave Hart for a raise.

Our understanding is that like every head coach in America, Martin would like to be extended a year for recruiting purposes, but when it comes to the nuts and bolts of his deal, he hasn't expressed any displeasure or desire to rework things to the administration in the athletic department at the University of Tennessee."

-Rob Lewis

What coach (other than a hot commodity) isn't going to say that?

Does Martin have an agent now?

 

[johnnybravo]

What coach (other than a hot commodity) isn't going to say that?

Does Martin have an agent now?

WTF? Of course he has an agent. Every coach does

 

[BigZiti09]

WTF? Of course he has an agent. Every coach does

Pretty sure Martin didn't when he got here.

 

[bamacheats]

Shaka Smart just got a raise to 1.2 million a year which is less than Martin is making now and he has taken that team to the Final 4 and to 2 straight NCAA tournaments. You are trying to justify giving a mediocre coach a raise based on what other mediocre coaches are making and it just doesn't even come close to flying.

How much of his salary is coming out of your pocket?

 

[Velo Vol]

WTF? Of course he has an agent. Every coach does

Maybe I'm confusing him with the Charlie Strong, who reportedly didn't have one when he was talking to UT.

 

[bamacheats]

Maybe I'm confusing him with the Charlie Strong, who reportedly didn't have one when he was talking to UT.

He didn't have a contract for quite a long time, just that MOU.

 

[InVOLuntary]

Doesn't extending his contract by one year effectively increase his buyout?

 

[bleedingTNorange]

Doesn't extending his contract by one year effectively increase his buyout?

Not if you negotiate that into the contract.

 

[InVOLuntary]

Not if you negotiate that into the contract.

So adding a year to the contract means nothing? I would think you'd have to pay him his contract or there wouldn't be any point in extending it.

 

[tennfever]

I'm a Martin fan but at least prove something to us but the UT way is just give the bucks away

 

[UTFanForLife]

So adding a year to the contract means nothing? I would think you'd have to pay him his contract or there wouldn't be any point in extending it.

The extention would only be for stability. I'm not sure what his buyout terms are, but it can be negotiated into the offer to not include the extended year unless "X" goal is met. If things go as they should next year, his contract is going to get re-done anyways.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

So adding a year to the contract means nothing? I would think you'd have to pay him his contract or there wouldn't be any point in extending it.

You can add or take away whatever you want...he doesn't have to agree to it or Hart doesn't have to. Hart can say ok you want an extension well give it to you but buyout stays the same, doesn't mean Martin has to accept. Same way as martins agent can say we want an extentsion, raise and triple the buyout...doesn't mean Hart has to accept it.

Martin want the extension solely for recruiting purposes...so add the extra year but don't put yourself in a worse spot financially...like I said doesn't have to accept it and yes it's essentially doing nothing, but it gives him the ability and perception to recruits that he's safe and will be here through their career.

 

[InVOLuntary]

I see that but if I personally think one more year means nothing to recruits unless you're under three years. Most of the recruits we need don't see themselves at the school more than three years anyway. I think for both parties it would be better to wait till after next season. I would be all for giving him a slight bump in pay and increasing some incentives.

 

[knowthevols]

You can add or take away whatever you want...he doesn't have to agree to it or Hart doesn't have to. Hart can say ok you want an extension well give it to you but buyout stays the same, doesn't mean Martin has to accept. Same way as martins agent can say we want an extentsion, raise and triple the buyout...doesn't mean Hart has to accept it.

Martin want the extension solely for recruiting purposes...so add the extra year but don't put yourself in a worse spot financially...like I said doesn't have to accept it and yes it's essentially doing nothing, but it gives him the ability and perception to recruits that he's safe and will be here through their career.

Sounds to me like some of you are alright with lying to recruits in signing them if the contract has no meaning and the extension is not enforcable then why do it?

 

[bleedingTNorange]

Sounds to me like some of you are alright with lying to recruits in signing them if the contract has no meaning and the extension is not enforcable then why do it?

How's it lying? He's under contract through their career at Tennessee, he can still be fired just like any coach can...it's just less of a financial burden for the school to do so.

 

[whobethis16]

Sounds to me like some of you are alright with lying to recruits in signing them if the contract has no meaning and the extension is not enforcable then why do it?

It does have meaning. It says that he's done a good enough job so far that warrants the AD to want him to continue being here, but not good enough to commit even longer. Martin's met several of the requirements thus far which should result in a reward. Actually, I'd say he's met all but 1. If he meets that one next year, he gets the money and more years.

 

[VolGee4]

Sounds to me like some of you are alright with lying to recruits in signing them if the contract has no meaning and the extension is not enforcable then why do it?

Lol. This is common practice in the coaching world. It is not like UT would be doing something different than every other school. You can extend the contract and still negotiate the same buyout. You expect him to be able to fulfill the entire contract, but the buyout clause allows you or him to terminate it early for less money. This is common stuff.

 

[BigZiti09]

You can add or take away whatever you want...he doesn't have to agree to it or Hart doesn't have to. Hart can say ok you want an extension well give it to you but buyout stays the same, doesn't mean Martin has to accept. Same way as martins agent can say we want an extentsion, raise and triple the buyout...doesn't mean Hart has to accept it.

Martin want the extension solely for recruiting purposes...so add the extra year but don't put yourself in a worse spot financially...like I said doesn't have to accept it and yes it's essentially doing nothing, but it gives him the ability and perception to recruits that he's safe and will be here through their career.

You would have to add an incentive for Martin. Adding a year to the deal is meaningless if buyout stays the same.

Best case scenario: bump his pay slightly, decrease the buyout, add a year to the contract.

 

[VolGee4]

You would have to add an incentive for Martin. Adding a year to the deal is meaningless if buyout stays the same.

Best case scenario: bump his pay slightly, decrease the buyout, add a year to the contract.

I understand what you are saying but I still believe it is an option. As long as he doesn't fail, he will get another year at his same salary. Plus, the buyout clauses usually decrease as he coaches more years, and the same amount can simply be extended an extra year.

 

[BigZiti09]

I'll use even round numbers here (not exact numbers that are in contract) just to make an illustration...

If Martin makes $1M per year and buyout states he gets paid full amount if fired, and he has 3 years left on deal, meaning if he's fired at end if season he's owed 2 more years.... That would mean he's paid $3 million if fired next march. That's 1m for 13-14, 14-15, 15-16.

If you keep salary the same and say we are going to add a year to deal extending you through 16-17, but buyout after this season is still $2M... Martin is the only one giving up anything. The only thing Martin gets is the ability to say to recruits he will be there for a while.

Is it possible? Yes. But usually an agent will realize that the University has to give something in this deal and get a salary bump for his client.

Now, if I'm hart I use this opportunity to show faith in my coach and extend his deal. It's cheaper to give him a bump in pay now than a year from now if he succeeds anyway. And if he doesn't succeed and you have to fire him a year or two from now, you've saved a buck.

 

[VolGee4]

I'll use even round numbers here (not exact numbers that are in contract) just to make an illustration...

If Martin makes $1M per year and buyout states he gets paid full amount if fired, and he has 3 years left on deal, meaning if he's fired at end if season he's owed 2 more years.... That would mean he's paid $3 million if fired next march. That's 1m for 13-14, 14-15, 15-16.

If you keep salary the same and say we are going to add a year to deal extending you through 16-17, but buyout after this season is still $2M... Martin is the only one giving up anything. The only thing Martin gets is the ability to say to recruits he will be there for a while.

Is it possible? Yes. But usually an agent will realize that the University has to give something in this deal and get a salary bump for his client.

Now, if I'm hart I use this opportunity to show faith in my coach and extend his deal. It's cheaper to give him a bump in pay now than a year from now if he succeeds anyway. And if he doesn't succeed and you have to fire him a year or two from now, you've saved a buck.

Well, first of all, as I am sure you know, the buyout is almost always less than the total amount left on the contract. That is the point of a buyout. That is why an extension of the contract and not changing the buyout can work. Second, yes, Martin is getting something. He is getting an extra year at his current salary. Technically, the school could just let his contract run out, and as long as they extend him, he keeps job security. Now, in this day and age of college sports, schools won't let a contract runout for publicity reasons. A coach usually gets bought out or leaves himself. He is also getting something to help him for recruiting purposes.

Finally, buyouts almost always decrease each year. For instance, a buyout after year one is usually high for both sides and then goes down. So, after year 2, the buyout could be $2 million for the remaining 3 years and then maybe decrease to $1.5 million after year 3. You can just extend the buyout where the coach maintains a higher buyout payment. This actually got UT in trouble with Dooley because Hamilton extended his buyout after year one going to a bowl game, and it cost the university much more money when Dooley was fired. That is why I am not always in favor of this tactic.

Really, it all depends on the numbers. I agree that may not necessarily be beneficial to the coach to extend the contract and not change the buyout, but it certainly is not hurting him. I guess that is my point.

 

[BigZiti09]

Really, it all depends on the numbers. But I can still argue that an extension without a change in the buyout is still favorable to Martin.

True. And just going off what I've learned about Martin, he'd probably be ok with just getting a year added for recruiting purposes even though it means nothing if you negotiate the buyout down to where it would cost UT the same amount to fire him.

Really, the years on the contract don't mean anything if the buyout reads that UT owes him the same regardless.

My understanding is that normally it would read something like "UT owes a coach x% per year remaining on the contract." So ideally, you'd extend the deal but wouldn't owe CCM anything for that last year that was just added.

 

[VolGee4]

True. And just going off what I've learned about Martin, he'd probably be ok with just getting a year added for recruiting purposes even though it means nothing if you negotiate the buyout down to where it would cost UT the same amount to fire him.

Really, the years on the contract don't mean anything if the buyout reads that UT owes him the same regardless.

My understanding is that normally it would read something like "UT owes a coach x% per year remaining on the contract." So ideally, you'd extend the deal but wouldn't owe CCM anything for that last year that was just added.

Sorry I edited my previous post. Basically saying that it doesn't hurt him regardless.

Yea, I think we are probably on a similar page.

 

[patrick]

I'll use even round numbers here (not exact numbers that are in contract) just to make an illustration...

If Martin makes $1M per year and buyout states he gets paid full amount if fired, and he has 3 years left on deal, meaning if he's fired at end if season he's owed 2 more years.... That would mean he's paid $3 million if fired next march. That's 1m for 13-14, 14-15, 15-16.

If you keep salary the same and say we are going to add a year to deal extending you through 16-17, but buyout after this season is still $2M... Martin is the only one giving up anything. The only thing Martin gets is the ability to say to recruits he will be there for a while.

Is it possible? Yes. But usually an agent will realize that the University has to give something in this deal and get a salary bump for his client.

Now, if I'm hart I use this opportunity to show faith in my coach and extend his deal. It's cheaper to give him a bump in pay now than a year from now if he succeeds anyway. And if he doesn't succeed and you have to fire him a year or two from now, you've saved a buck.

I have read the posts in this thread as well as many coaching search threads. What aggravates me to no end is the talk of UT (or whatever school) needing to "show faith in my coach" by giving him a freaking raise. I am so tired of hearing about that load of bs. How about a coach showing the university his "faith" by adhering to the terms of his contract and actually making to a meaningful post season tourney before he seeks a raise and extension!

Its very similar to when Fulmer was given raises and extensions for average performance because people said oh no maybe he will leave for another job... someone tell me what other job Fulmer had offered to him.

And someone tell me who is chasing CCM, a coach who has yet to make it to the big dance??? Some on this board talk about CCM making the sweet 16 next year so he should be paid now because schools will knock down the door to hire him. Let him get in the tourney first!

I seriously doubt that CCM is on any major D-1 programs short list at this point in his coaching career!!!!

 

[BigZiti09]

I have read the posts in this thread as well as many coaching search threads. What aggravates me to no end is the talk of UT (or whatever school) needing to "show faith in my coach" by giving him a freaking raise. I am so tired of hearing about that load of bs. How about a coach showing the university his "faith" by adhering to the terms of his contract and actually making to a meaningful post season tourney before he seeks a raise and extension!

Its very similar to when Fulmer was given raises and extensions for average performance because people said oh no maybe he will leave for another job... someone tell me what other job Fulmer had offered to him.

And someone tell me who is chasing CCM, a coach who has yet to make it to the big dance??? Some on this board talk about CCM making the sweet 16 next year so he should be paid now because schools will knock down the door to hire him. Let him get in the tourney first!

I seriously doubt that CCM is on any major D-1 programs short list at this point in his coaching career!!!!

Nobody is talking about raising his pay significantly. The scenario I was using was bump his pay slightly to help negotiate down the buyout.

It would be a smart move for UT financially. If he has to be fired, it costs less. If he works out, you've shown faith in him and he will remember that when and if schools come calling. Also, it helps recruiting.

Cuonzo hasn't shown he's the long term answer here. But he hasn't shown he's a bust either. So in my opinion, since you still aren't sure what you're getting, the best move is to give him the support he needs (add a year) to add a great class in 2014, and protect UT (lower the buyout).

My initial reaction to all this was "heck no, he hasn't earned it." But now I think it's an issue with deeper layers.

UT has a chance to be proactive rather than reactive here. Negotiate now and UT has the edge at the table. Something hammy never had. He was always there just sitting down with a coach who just won and he was pulling out the checkbook. If you negotiate now, you can add the year, give a minimal raise if it comes to that, negotiate down the buyout hopefully and you wouldn't be renegotiating a deal next year which is favorable to UT again. If he wins big next year, you're gonna have to pay him if you don't do a new deal this offseason. If he flops, it's just as easy to fire him had you not redone his contract this offseason and you can say you gave him all the support needed and that will help when you go to hire a new coach.