-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!
The CSewe coach makes 2x the UW coach?
- Thread starter McPeachy
- Start date
JimmyDimes
Well-known member
McPeachy said:
No shit...CSU should be doing better than 2-4 against the Pokes over the past 6 games. In all seriousness, CSU got lucky with McElweenie....OC from a high profile program with no head coaching experience. Sound familiar? However, this is one area UW needs to address.....especially the assistant coaching salaries.
HiCountryCowboy
Well-known member
JimmyDimes said:
2-0 the past two games, though, and oh, did they make us look like a last place team.
I am no fan of DC, especially with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, but we'll soon see if csu got "lucky" with McElwain. My hunch is that Jack Graham knew how to make an athletic department a winner and has his plan in motion even though he is gone. If they get "lucky" twice in a row, can we finally have enough evidence to kick Burman's ass out of town?
JimmyDimes
Well-known member
Agree 100%...especially the part about Burman. Wyoming can't sit on their hands when it come to assistant coaching salaries, or salaries in general. If we fall behind CSU with Bohl at the helm, Burman needs to be shown the door. He needs to be shown the door if Wyoming isn't in the conversation for a MWC football title in the next three years.HiCountryCowboy said:
HiCountryCowboy
Well-known member
JimmyDimes said:
Since he was just extended for some f'ing reason, I say he should have till the end of 2015 to generate a championship in ANY MWC sport or the posse's coming. Honestly, he should've been fired with Heath and/or Christensen - we could use his salary for assistant coaches, Any one of us could oversee no measurable success on the field/court for decade and we'd likely do if for a bottle or a 12-pack
I am growing tired of the head shed in athletics. I really like Burman personally...but he has produced very, very little. Other than building some facilities, which Ben Blalock actually got done by spearheading the fundraising, Tom has very little, if anything, to show for his tenure as AD. We have no real identity and fan support seems to be tanking...
All of this said, I really don't think that I trust Old Main to hire an AD right now...
All of this said, I really don't think that I trust Old Main to hire an AD right now...
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
When Burman took over, we had a bigger budget than CSU. In 8 short years, they have eclipsed us.
joshvanklomp
Well-known member
The Iowa head coach made 2x the Minnesota coach. Which was the more inept team, the one playing in the Citrus Bowl or the one playing in the TaxSlayer Bowl?McPeachy said:
Coaches' salaries aren't everything. Sure, it can help, but it's far from the be-all-end-all in determining the success of an athletic department.
McPeachy
Well-known member
joshvanklomp said:
Hmmmm.
I would venture to say that things will "true up" one way or another. Historically, they always will / do.
Minnesota
2005 7-5
2006 6-7
2007 1-11
2008 7-6
2009 6-7
2010 3-9
2011 3-9
2012 6-7
2013 8-5
2014 8-4
Iowa
2005 7-5
2006 6-7
2007 6-6
2008 9-7
2009 11-2
2010 8-5
2011 7-6
2012 4-8
2013 8-5
2014 7-5
NowherePoke
Well-known member
joshvanklomp said:
The head coaches salary isn't that important. What really matters are the overall staff salary level (which ties into the HC salary a little as he probably expects to make a certain multiple over his coordinators).
Bohl may be a very high quality coach (history suggests he is), but have we given him the resources to hire the staff necessary to implement his program? If we offered the same staff salaries as CSU, would Steve Stanard be our DC? Let me just say that I doubt it.
A football team is a very large operation and the overall staff composition is critical. The head coach matters more in Basketball where the staff is small and the HC interacts daily with each and every player and can work closely with each assistant.
HC salary doesn't really matter at this level other than whether or not you are paying enough to hire a quality candidate, but I can't honestly say that we have had problems hiring the head coach that we have wanted recently. Glenn and Bohl were fairly obvious hires and DC was a highly thought of coordinator. All were quality MWC level hires on paper.
Obviously, if any of them have success we won't be able to match larger P5 offers, but neither can CSU as we just saw so it doesn't really matter anyway.
Wyo2dal
Well-known member
You have to look at incentives as well, CSU coach might have gone for a big check with no incentive or smaller incentive means more money if the program does ok but nothing special. Bohl has a lot of incentives on his contract that can potentially earn him a lot more money.
Also P5 -> MWC vs FCS -> MWC Wyoming can get away with paying Bohl lower just because he isn't a College Powerhouse Coach. Let's see how it ends on the field in one more year.
Also P5 -> MWC vs FCS -> MWC Wyoming can get away with paying Bohl lower just because he isn't a College Powerhouse Coach. Let's see how it ends on the field in one more year.
joshvanklomp
Well-known member
Coaching is a relationships business. Most coaches bring coaches with them that they are familiar with. It's not usually an open bidding war where you bid on the top guys on the market.NowherePoke said:
Some of Kill's assistants have been with him since he was coaching at the Division II level 20 years ago. Could he have found someone "better" along the way? Most likely.
So yes, I do think Stanard would be the DC. The only way he wouldn't is if Klieman also came with from NDSU.
McPeachy
Well-known member
joshvanklomp said:
You are underestimating the football coaching fraternity. There are ties that run deeper than what you just read about in the paper or Wikipedia.
I would bet that if Bohl had the salary pool for assistants, that Honey BooBoo does at CSewe, there would be quite a few differences on the staff at UW. His ties run pretty deep, and pretty far. See Duval for instance. See Brown for instance.
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
Success is highly correlated to budget. I also think that budget status (increasing, decreasing, rate of increase, etc.) is correlated to success.
You can always point to anomalies along the way, but by and large budget impacts success.
You can always point to anomalies along the way, but by and large budget impacts success.
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
This from espn regarding changing coaches in NFL...
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/theres-not-much-evidence-a-new-coach-will-help-the-jets-49ers-or-falcons/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Basically, when accounting for poor record the year before, there really is not an improvement most times with changing coaches.
This has been one of my biggest complaints at WYO, and I think if a similar study were done in the NCAA, similar results would be found. However, they would have to account for such things as budget. If you change coaches and increase your budget (ala CSU) you find success. If you change coaches and nothing else (ala UNLV) or add some to your facilities (ala WYO), nothing really changes.
I like the premise of the articles: coaches are scapegoats to make administrators and fans feel better for underlying problems that can't be fixed by coaches.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/theres-not-much-evidence-a-new-coach-will-help-the-jets-49ers-or-falcons/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Basically, when accounting for poor record the year before, there really is not an improvement most times with changing coaches.
This has been one of my biggest complaints at WYO, and I think if a similar study were done in the NCAA, similar results would be found. However, they would have to account for such things as budget. If you change coaches and increase your budget (ala CSU) you find success. If you change coaches and nothing else (ala UNLV) or add some to your facilities (ala WYO), nothing really changes.
I like the premise of the articles: coaches are scapegoats to make administrators and fans feel better for underlying problems that can't be fixed by coaches.
