ROI on New Coach

#1
W

West Coast Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
141
Likes
374
#1
Most of you guys are much more informed than me on the financial position of the athletic department, so I'm interested in your opinion.

Based on what I have read, between reduced ticket, concession, merchandise sales, etc. a poor football team can cost the university many, many millions of dollars.

Would it not make sense, then, to go out an pay big money (say $8mm+) to get the best of the best coach (e.g. Gruden, Saban, Harbaugh, etc.). Maybe that opens a can of worms nationally on what coaches deserve to be paid. However, from a pure financial perspective wouldn't that be better than giving the current coach another year or even saving a few million on an unproven assistant coach that might achieve the same result as Dooley.

Am I remotely correct that from a pure financial standpoint, landing a big name, high quality coach would pay strong dividends financially even if we paid him much more than anyone else in college sports is currently being paid?

What is the argument that anyone in the administration would make behind closed doors against this line of thought. Fear of an arms race? (legit concern)

Anyhow, thanks for humoring this question...
 
#6
#6
Drivebye said:
Pipe dream! Jmo!
Click to expand...

I think you're probably right. I'm just not sure why that is. Why would we not pay top dollar for phenomenal leadership? Again, I don't have the numbers, but I suspect that a competitive program led by a great coach translates into a lot more than the highest paid coaches make.

I wonder how much more, per year, UK has made under Calipari than they did under his predecessor. Same for Alabama under Saban, or Stanford when Harbaugh was there. How much more revenue is Notre Dame bringing in under Kelly than the prior 3 coaches.

Anyhow, I don't know the answer, but it seems like the return on a competitive program justifies the financial investment to get the best coach possible...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12
#12
West Coast Vol said:
Most of you guys are much more informed than me on the financial position of the athletic department, so I'm interested in your opinion.

Based on what I have read, between reduced ticket, concession, merchandise sales, etc. a poor football team can cost the university many, many millions of dollars.

Would it not make sense, then, to go out an pay big money (say $8mm+) to get the best of the best coach (e.g. Gruden, Saban, Harbaugh, etc.). Maybe that opens a can of worms nationally on what coaches deserve to be paid. However, from a pure financial perspective wouldn't that be better than giving the current coach another year or even saving a few million on an unproven assistant coach that might achieve the same result as Dooley.

Am I remotely correct that from a pure financial standpoint, landing a big name, high quality coach would pay strong dividends financially even if we paid him much more than anyone else in college sports is currently being paid?

What is the argument that anyone in the administration would make behind closed doors against this line of thought. Fear of an arms race? (legit concern)

Anyhow, thanks for humoring this question...
Click to expand...

Alabama already started this when they hired Saban. It is in our court now as to whether we step up and compete or continue to "settle" for mediocrity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#13
#13
What the administration knows for certain is that no matter what we say now -- we'll be back next season with our duffs squeezed into those bleacher seats.

The schedule is very conducive to Vol fans showing up:

We will be there at the opener against Austen Peay (8/31/2013) and the following cupcake game against Western Kentucky (9/7/2013).

We then play both Oregon (9/14) and Florida (9/21) away. The (9/28) game against South Alabama is another cupcake at home but so much time will have passed folks will want to be back at any Neyland game.

Come Oct. 2013 we'll be there no matter what for Georgia as well as on Oct 19 for S.Car.

After that we have two away games Bama (10/26) followed by Mizzou (11/02).

People will also want to attend the Auburn (11/9) and Vandy (11/23) games that round out our home games. Our final game against UK (11/30) is away.
 
#14
#14
jedvol70 said:
Alabama already started this when they hired Saban. It is in our court now as to whether we step up and compete or continue to "settle" for mediocrity.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I hope we do step up and I believe there would be a financial return to that decision.
 
#15
#15
UTProf said:
What the administration knows for certain is that no matter what we say now -- we'll be back next season with our duffs squeezed into those bleacher seats.

The schedule is very conducive to Vol fans showing up:

We will be there at the opener against Austen Peay (8/31/2013) and the following cupcake game against Western Kentucky (9/7/2013).

We then play both Oregon (9/14) and Florida (9/21) away. The (9/28) game against South Alabama is another cupcake at home but so much time will have passed folks will want to be back at any Neyland game.

Come Oct. 2013 we'll be there no matter what for Georgia as well as on Oct 19 for S.Car.

After that we have two away games Bama (10/26) followed by Mizzou (11/02).

People will also want to attend the Auburn (11/9) and Vandy (11/23) games that round out our home games. Our final game against UK (11/30) is away.
Click to expand...

No, just like this year not many showed up for Troy or Missouri. On top of that you have merchandise and donations will be way down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#16
#16
Hart does not have to break any records with this hire he just has to do his homework and work tirelessly to find a coach who is a great recruiter and coach. The new coach must be able to do both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#17
#17
Would be a financial nightmare at first. However, a winning team would pay dividends in the long run. I would love to see 50k seats added to Neyland.
 
#19
#19
A losing team isn't just bad for the university. It's bad for the city. The bars and what not are not selling as much, hotels for out of town fans etc. we start winning the city comes to life.
 
#21
#21
UTProf said:
What the administration knows for certain is that no matter what we say now -- we'll be back next season with our duffs squeezed into those bleacher seats.

The schedule is very conducive to Vol fans showing up:

We will be there at the opener against Austen Peay (8/31/2013) and the following cupcake game against Western Kentucky (9/7/2013).

We then play both Oregon (9/14) and Florida (9/21) away. The (9/28) game against South Alabama is another cupcake at home but so much time will have passed folks will want to be back at any Neyland game.

Come Oct. 2013 we'll be there no matter what for Georgia as well as on Oct 19 for S.Car.

After that we have two away games Bama (10/26) followed by Mizzou (11/02).

People will also want to attend the Auburn (11/9) and Vandy (11/23) games that round out our home games. Our final game against UK (11/30) is away.
Click to expand...

Have you not noticed there are no cupcake games for UT anymore or have you not been watching
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#23
#23
West Coast Vol said:
Most of you guys are much more informed than me on the financial position of the athletic department, so I'm interested in your opinion.

Based on what I have read, between reduced ticket, concession, merchandise sales, etc. a poor football team can cost the university many, many millions of dollars.

Would it not make sense, then, to go out an pay big money (say $8mm+) to get the best of the best coach (e.g. Gruden, Saban, Harbaugh, etc.). Maybe that opens a can of worms nationally on what coaches deserve to be paid. However, from a pure financial perspective wouldn't that be better than giving the current coach another year or even saving a few million on an unproven assistant coach that might achieve the same result as Dooley.

Am I remotely correct that from a pure financial standpoint, landing a big name, high quality coach would pay strong dividends financially even if we paid him much more than anyone else in college sports is currently being paid?

What is the argument that anyone in the administration would make behind closed doors against this line of thought. Fear of an arms race? (legit concern)

Anyhow, thanks for humoring this question...
Click to expand...


Then what....$15 million, then $20 then the sky's the limit. Except you have to remember one thing. The school doesn't pay the salary, the fans do. Tickets are already at an all-time high, despite the economy. How much are you willing to pay? How many games have you attended in the past few years? Is it due to expense? It'll only go higher as coaches make more.
 
#24
#24
jedvol70 said:
Alabama already started this when they hired Saban. It is in our court now as to whether we step up and compete or continue to "settle" for mediocrity.
Click to expand...

Hell, I'd take mediocrity right now. Beats the current irrelevance of our football program.
 
#25
#25
ReelfootVol said:
Would be a financial nightmare at first. However, a winning team would pay dividends in the long run. I would love to see 50k seats added to Neyland.
Click to expand...

With the way Neyland is built you can't really add many more seats before you run into code issues.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top