ROI on New Coach

#26
#26
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...
Of course. It's business law. Other than take care of the nickels and dimes and the dollars will take care of themselves. It takes money to make money. Wisely spent money that is.
 
#27
#27
frankthetank said:
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.
Click to expand...

Welcome to VN, frankthetank. :hi:

I gave you a "welcome aboard" like.
 
#28
#28
"Bama was willing to pay Saban $4 million-plus and at the time it was considered outrageous..I thought so too..But I would heartily endorse that kind of money if UT could accomplish what "Bama's money has..JMHO but Chris Petersen would probably not cost more than $3 million per and if he could win 81 of his first 89 at UT as he did at Boise, it would be well worth it and more...
 
Last edited:
#30
#30
TnScooby said:
"Bama was willing to pay Saban $4 million-plus and at the time it was considered outrageous..I thought so too..But I would heartily endorse that kind of money if UT could accomplish what "Bama's money has..JMHO but Chris Petersen would probably not cost more than $3 million per and if he could win 81 of his first 89 at UT as he did at Boise, it would be well woth it and more...
Click to expand...

You'd have to pay Peterson Saban money + to get him out of Boise. He has a good thing going and seems to have little to no desire to get out of there.
 
#31
#31
$10-15mil annually for a quality, winning staff makes a lot more sense to me than a $200mil stadium renovation
 
#32
#32
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...

It is apparent that most posters do not know what is going on so they just make up stuff to post which is usually 180 degrees from reality.
 
#33
#33
simple as this...if a football team makes a bowl game, the university breaks even (for all sports), if they dont, they lost say....8-15 million depending on university.
 
#34
#34
TnScooby said:
"Bama was willing to pay Saban $4 million-plus and at the time it was considered outrageous..I thought so too..But I would heartily endorse that kind of money if UT could accomplish what "Bama's money has..JMHO but Chris Petersen would probably not cost more than $3 million per and if he could win 81 of his first 89 at UT as he did at Boise, it would be well woth it and more...
Click to expand...

If anyone could win 81 of 89 games here just starting next year, would have to be one awesome coach and recruiter. Whoever is hired isn't going to win more than 9 at best next year probably.
 
#36
#36
West Coast Vol said:
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...
Click to expand...

Alabama paid the bucks for Saban and made it back in the first year or two. People pay to see a winner. People buy more merchandise when the team is winning. More people attend the games and spend more money in Knoxville and in the stadium when the team is winning. Tennessee has just spent millions for a state of the art facility. Why not spend the money on a staff that is going to win!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#37
#37
UGADawg4Life said:
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.
Click to expand...

This is the arms race argument. I suspect, though, that without even raising ticket prices the Tennessee program could make the money back just in selling out every game, concessions, merchandise sales, advertising, etc.

Plus, my guess is Alabama, Oregon, Notre Dame, etc. do not hear too many complaints about ticket prices. It's like most things, people are willing to pay if they are getting their money's worth. And, unfortunately, the average fan of those programs are getting more out of their money right now than Tennessee fans.

Hopefully this changes soon.
 
#38
#38
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...

I think whoever they get will have to win, field competitive teams that fans want to see. If it can be done in year one even better.

As for the straight dope on the cash, after the first of the year we'll know the revenues from football this year and if it goes the way it has been going, it will have dropped from the previous year. The numbers are out there and the direction is alarming.

I remember Dooley making a joke about cutting some recruiting services and forgetting the football team brought in 100 million. We could be down 30% from when he started, in just 3 years...maybe more.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top