Analysis: MAC Coaches Salaries Lowest in 1A + Kelly's deal

MACReport · Post by **MACReport** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 8:29 pm

I just posted a piece on MAC Report Online analyzing MAC football coaches salaries which also included a breakdown of Brian Kelly's new deal at UC after receiving a copy of his contract.

Most disheartening though is the fact that the MAC trails the Sun Belt in coaching salaries...not that anybody is getting poor mind you.

http://www.macreportonline.com/coaches_salary.html

Falconfreak90 · Post by **Falconfreak90** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:48 pm

A disturbing piece, no doubt. Well written article. Either the MAC steps up....

CapitalFalcon · Post by **CapitalFalcon** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:11 am

Wow! This is disheartening. We can't even compete with other mid-majors, let alone the major conferences. No wonder no one stays in our conference long...

Dayons_Den · Post by **Dayons_Den** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:05 am

What's the old line? You get what you pay for. . .

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:10 am

When the primary selling point to coaches is your conference's status as a stepping stone to other opportunities, you shouldn't be suprised when people leave.

We need to pay these guys a lot more and we need to pay our assitants more. Perhaps then, people will look at this job as soemthiong other than a pathway to a better gig.

BGSUFootballFan · Post by **BGSUFootballFan** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:15 pm

Embarrassing.

kdog27 · Post by **kdog27** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:42 pm

We can't even pay as much as Buffalo. Weak.

BGSUFootballFan · Post by **BGSUFootballFan** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:47 pm

kdog27 wrote:We can't even pay as much as Buffalo. Weak.

Yet we complain about not blowing them out by 30.

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:05 pm

Personally...I would like to see llike a golden goose pay plan
where by bases were fair and reasonable as they are now, but add in 20 k per win, 30 for a ranked team and 200k for an undefeated regular season and so on.
pay for performance.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:08 pm

The problem with incentive laden contracts for college coaches is the image factor. It seems unseemly to base so much of a coach's pay on w/l's. Now, bump the base up and make the bonuses smaller....and make hitting the top 10% in graduation rates as rewarding as an undefeatred season and people probably wouldn't complain a lot...well they would here, but that's just the nature of the board.

JoeFalcon · Post by **JoeFalcon** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 1:13 pm

I'm going contrarian on this one.

Joe Novak has carved out a nice long-term niche for himself in the MAC. So has Tom Amstutz. That's two in 12.

Of the 38 members of Conference USA, the Mountain West, the WAC and the Sun Belt, there's just 6 'lifers,' only 4 of whom (Pat Hill, Jeff Bower, Sonny Lubick and Rocky Long) have seen their schools at the IA level throughout their tenure.

Others have not stayed very long in both leagues because they've been asked to leave.

Basically, these other leagues are in the exact same position in terms of coaching retention, salary be damned.

Only one coach (Urban Meyer) has recently left the MAC voluntarily for a non BCS job, and it's simply unrealistic to expect MAC schools to compete with those affiliated with the BCS for the reasons explained in the piece.

Should the MAC pay their coaches more? Sure. It it a immediate concern that's severe enough to provoke some of the reaction seen on this thread? Not even close.

redskins4ever · Post by **redskins4ever** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 9:24 pm

MAC schools should look to endow their college coaching salaries the way you endow professorships.