"advantages he has yet had"?

okaydo;842607703 said:

---

"advantages he has yet had"?

---

In addition to selling 1 to 5 to 7.... One can imagine that it's being sold that he did so through an AD change, one that has been less than ideally supportive at times, along with academic constraints.

okaydo;842607703 said:

---

"advantages he has yet had"?

---

A defense?

SD had a D this season that was average in points per game allowed. A remarkable improvement from the previous years, even going back to La Tech...

okaydo;842607703 said:

---

"advantages he hasn't yet had"

---

Yes. Like:
1. Better players to start with.
2. Not as stringent academic standards.
3. More $$$$ available for the program.
4. More campus wide focus on FB.
5. More of a FB support among alums and fans.
6. Most Important NO MORE cr*p from BearInsider posters. (just kidding)

bear945;842607717 said:

---

A defense?

---

Made my day..thanks lol.

CaliforniaEternal;842607077 said:

---

He'd gladly give Chachere and tommerdahl increases but the performance would still be subpar.

---

Based on what exactly?

Like maybe a 3 year track record of not having a winning conference record....

68great;842607744 said:

---

Yes. Like:
1. Better players to start with.
2. Not as stringent academic standards.
3. More $$$$ available for the program.
4. More campus wide focus on FB.
5. More of a FB support among alums and fans.
6. Most Important NO MORE cr*p from BearInsider posters. (just kidding)

---

You can argue point #1.
Points 3-5 are pretty much the same.
So basically it comes down to the paycheck and academic standards.

Looks like Mark Richt is going to be head coach at The U. I don't know if he interviewed at Mizzou. Barry Odom, the current DC is going to get a second interview.

Boot;842606946 said:

---

For 5 million a year and with players who can barely read or write.

---

That's the current state of big-time college football, like it or not. If you don't want to play the game, get out or join the Ivy League.

Golden One;842607983 said:

---

That's the current state of big-time college football, like it or not. If you don't want to play the game, get out or join the Ivy League.

---

Furd disagrees.

NYCGOBEARS;842607987 said:

---

Furd disagrees.

---

Revision of his post:

"That's the current state of big-time college football, like it or not. If you don't want to play the game, get out, join the Ivy League, or morph into a private school that exploits its $$$ and advantages and ability to pull strings to graduate players."

Golden One;842607983 said:

---

That's the current state of big-time college football, like it or not. If you don't want to play the game, get out or join the Ivy League.

---

Or recruit a crap full of offensive and defensive lineman to cover over the inadequacies of the coaches or system used.

TheSouseFamily;842607025 said:

---

The decision to fold against Stanford in order to keep the score close makes a lot more sense now. Sonny is no dummy and managing perception for potential new employers was obviously very top of mind.

---

If true, that has to be a breach of contract, both with the players and the university, and should be grounds for a lawsuit.

510Bear;842606978 said:

---

Love the Hue prom analogy, though I'm picturing it more like "We turned down Hue when he asked us to the senior prom, and now at our 5-year HS reunion, he's in law school and has a hot girlfriend, and we're pregnant with our second kid and working at the gas station."

---

Son of a...

If Dykes is interviewing at South Carolina, it means he did not get the job.

Sounds like he is still twisting in the wind. Looking to get the best deal. We probably gave him a $400K upgrade. He wanted a million.

Hopefully we got a bigger pool for the assistants.

Oski87;842608281 said:

---

If Dykes is interviewing at South Carolina, it means he did not get the job.

Sounds like he is still twisting in the wind. Looking to get the best deal. We probably gave him a $400K upgrade. He wanted a million.

Hopefully we got a bigger pool for the assistants.

---

None of our current assistants deserves a penny more than what they currently earn.

Our coordinators are already paid well. Our position coaches are paid below market value. But they also perform below market value.

I'd like to see the assistant salaries bumped up for new hires, not for the current coaches. I don't see anyone rushing to get their hands on our assistants.

Yes, Likens left last year. But it wasn't because of the money. It was to become a coordinator.

Are you coach likens ? Don't speak for him. Do you think money is not a major factor ?

The more I read growls the more i get confused with the outright ignorance of this fan base

So we won't pay these coaches more but will pay New coaches more???

I guess ... Let me know how that works out

Ucla has an OL coach making 200k more than our OC/DC ...

The gap will only get bigger.


This whole situation makes Cal look bad.

going4roses;842608300 said:

---

Are you coach likens ? Don't speak for him. Do you think money is not a major factor ?

The more I read growls the more i get confused with the outright ignorance of this fan base

So we won't pay these coaches more but will pay New coaches more???

I guess ... Let me know how that works out

Ucla has an OL coach making 200k more than our OC/DC ...

The gap will only get bigger.


This whole situation makes Cal look bad.

---

I think his point was that our current guys have not earned raises but new assistants would come with better credentials and deserve more money. So, absent an increase in performance, you pay the new guys more but not the existing ones. Totally reasonable.

going4roses;842608300 said:

---

Are you coach likens ? Don't speak for him. Do you think money is not a major factor ?

The more I read growls the more i get confused with the outright ignorance of this fan base

So we won't pay these coaches more but will pay New coaches more???

I guess ... Let me know how that works out

Ucla has an OL coach making 200k more than our OC/DC ...

The gap will only get bigger.


This whole situation makes Cal look bad.

---

OK. And I know this will generate some flames but I have a really hard time justifying paying POSITION coaches more than a full step 12 prof. Both are expected to work with students closely and pass on their "craft". Both are expected to be experts in their field, doing original research to advance knowledge in their area of expertise. Both do NOT necessarily have management responsibilities - a key difference between them and say the HC or the Coordinators.

Does that mean you can grab some guy off the street and make him Line Coach? no. But it does mean that you probably could do a heck of a lot better than Yenser if you went out and found some guy who had been teaching HS ball for 20 years and brought him to Cal, paid him $150 to 200K.

Now that is fantasyland and I know "the market" dictates the going rate but the inflation in especially position coaches over the past few years is obscene for guys that have very little independent oversight in respect to their profession (no peer reviewing of their body of work) and one of their key attributes is "loyalty" to the guy above them and that they played upper level football.

Assistant coaches are part of a major revenue generating venture. Professors generally are not. Relative skill sets matter less than the nature of how the skills are applied (ie, physicians make more than veterinarians).

socaltownie;842608311 said:

---

OK. And I know this will generate some flames but I have a really hard time justifying paying POSITION coaches more than a full step 12 prof. Both are expected to work with students closely and pass on their "craft". Both are expected to be experts in their field, doing original research to advance knowledge in their area of expertise. Both do NOT necessarily have management responsibilities - a key difference between them and say the HC or the Coordinators.

Does that mean you can grab some guy off the street and make him Line Coach? no. But it does mean that you probably could do a heck of a lot better than Yenser if you went out and found some guy who had been teaching HS ball for 20 years and brought him to Cal, paid him $150 to 200K.

Now that is fantasyland and I know "the market" dictates the going rate but the inflation in especially position coaches over the past few years is obscene for guys that have very little independent oversight in respect to their profession (no peer reviewing of their body of work) and one of their key attributes is "loyalty" to the guy above them and that they played upper level football.

---

The point about how much assistants are paid vs professors is a whole another bag of worms

It's not uncommon, in all professions, to test your 'market' worth when performance reviews and salary discussions are being discussed.
Perhaps, maybe way off track, Sonny may be discussing what other schools are paying assistant coaches.

edg64;842608397 said:

---

It's not uncommon, in all professions, to test your 'market' worth when performance reviews and salary discussions are being discussed.
Perhaps, maybe way off track, Sonny may be discussing what other schools are paying assistant coaches.

---

That may be true, but in all professions you typically don't want your 'market testing' plastered all over the media. Employers aren't big fans of that.

tequila4kapp;842608314 said:

---

Assistant coaches are part of a major revenue generating venture. Professors generally are not. Relative skill sets matter less than the nature of how the skills are applied (ie, physicians make more than veterinarians).

---

Wrong. I paid tuition at Cal for four years. I did that because of the professors. Football was just a bonus.

Education brings in tuition and state support. Tuition and state support makes WAY more than football.

Oski Bear;842608415 said:

---

Wrong. I paid tuition at Cal for four years. I did that because of the professors. Football was just a bonus.

Education brings in tuition and state support. Tuition and state support makes WAY more than football.

---

While football is not mission critical, it is a revenue generator that subsidizes the entire athletic department.

Professors are a line item expense. Because our tuition doesn't cover basic expenses the system is subsidized by the state. Professors are not part of a money making venture.

tequila4kapp;842608422 said:

---

While football is not mission critical, it is a revenue generator that subsidizes the entire athletic department.

Professors are a line item expense. Because our tuition doesn't cover basic expenses the system is subsidized by the state. Professors are not part of a money making venture.

---

Bingo.

And the last time I checked, our Athletic Department budget was over $89 million.
Beach volleyball, gymnastics, or cross country won't help in paying that.
But I think there is a sport that starts with the letter "F" that does.

You paid tuition at Cal because of the professors? I asked a question on this board a couple of weeks ago, "Why is Cal a good school?" No one said it was because of the professors. Because, apparently, most are off doing research instead of concentrating on teaching their students.

Oski Bear;842608415 said:

---

Wrong. I paid tuition at Cal for four years. I did that because of the professors. Football was just a bonus.

Education brings in tuition and state support. Tuition and state support makes WAY more than football.

---

I went to Cal for the football, and because it was close to the Giants. The professors barely spoke english and had their back to the classroom the entire time. Some of the sections were inspiring, the ones taught by grad students who spoke english.

pure gold 510Bear

MinotStateBeav;842608400 said:

---

That may be true, but in all professions you typically don't want your 'market testing' plastered all over the media. Employers aren't big fans of that.

---

Dead on and why some posters do not see how poorly this has been handled by Sonny and/or agent boy is just puzzling.

tequila4kapp;842608422 said:

---

While football is not mission critical, it is a revenue generator that subsidizes the entire athletic department.

Professors are a line item expense. Because our tuition doesn't cover basic expenses the system is subsidized by the state. Professors are not part of a money making venture.

---

Actually that isn't universally (or likely even 50%+ true). To hit step 12 you are probably generating more than enough "grant overhead" to pay your salary. In some departments (humanities in particular) that probably isn't the case but definitely true in the sciences and social sciences.

Now the MARGIN probably isn't as great as football. But most step 12s are fully pulling their weight in external $$$

socaltownie;842608457 said:

---

Actually that isn't universally (or likely even 50%+ true). To hit step 12 you are probably generating more than enough "grant overhead" to pay your salary. In some departments (humanities in particular) that probably isn't the case but definitely true in the sciences and social sciences.

Now the MARGIN probably isn't as great as football. But most step 12s are fully pulling their weight in external $$$

---

Some online message boards have a "like" feature. I wish BI did. If so, I'd use it here. Thanks for the good info.

let's not forget too that we thought that the top of the conference would be much better than they turned out to be, Pac was down this year and was there for the taking. I can't help but thinking this season is the best this coaching staff can do under the "easiest" circumstances.