5 Years $21.33M

Status
Not open for further replies.
GTCrew said:
Why? If you offer him $1.5M would he not take it?

Where is this lunacy that Andrew keeps ranting about that we have to pay some kind of market rate like this? It is idiotic, but I will admit probably prevalent.

Does anyone really think that Key can make more than $1.5 million anywhere else next year? He was making 600k as an Oline coach and doing an absolutely horrible job at it, so in my mind if he doesn't take our HC offer he might have problems matching the 600k. Nobody else is going to offer him a HC spot, so thats not a problem. I don't see any chance of him being offered an OC spot, do you? Maybe he can make mid six figures on an NFL staff?

Frankly, it would be asinine to offer Key any more than what he can earn elsewhere. Key's market rate is completely different than the market rate of the other coaches in the conference.

The original post rumor was remarkable in that it reflected that reality and did not fall into the stupidity that is Andrew's argument that the market rate matters at all. The market rate only matters if someone else wants Key. Nobody else wants him, so the market rate is what we and Key agree on.

The perfect contract is one that gives Key modestly more money than he can earn somewhere else, with a profit sharing structure that richly rewards him if his performance benefits GT.
Click to expand...
The fact is we aren't going to hire him just to be cheap. If we hire him it's going to be because he's proven himself for the remainder of the season and he is the guy the administration wants going forward. In that case, the salary will be $3M and I don't think he's going to give a "discount" just because it's his home school, regardless of what other options he has. Also, he's making more than $600k now... between $800k and $1M IIRC.
 
Some of you want to throw money at a candidate who doesn't need the incentive to coach here. You all are terrible business decision makers. You already base your decision to hire on emotional feelings like he is a Techman, he really wants Tech to win bad, or the players really play hard for him, while overlooking his three year performance while coaching at Tech. This ain't some dude TStan brought in to clean things up. He was part of the mess.
 
andrew said:
$1.5 million would be only half of what the next-lowest paid guy in the conference makes. I thought we could get Key cheap but the numbers you guys are throwing out seem a little crazy.

I was thinking more like $2.5 million a year with only a half million dollar buyout or something. Because that's really the key, the buyout -- if the buyout is low then there's no harm in giving a halfway decent salary.
Click to expand...
I'll agree to $2.0 million. :P

Let's see him win 1-2 more and keep the improved look first.
 
GoGATech said:
The fact is we aren't going to hire him just to be cheap. If we hire him it's going to be because he's proven himself for the remainder of the season and he is the guy the administration wants going forward. In that case, the salary will be $3M and I don't think he's going to give a "discount" just because it's his home school, regardless of what other options he has. Also, he's making more than $600k now... between $800k and $1M IIRC.
Click to expand...

Even $3M is too much in that situation, for a position coach jumping to head coach. Maybe it could be a climbed contract that ends above that, but he shouldn't make that his first two years.
 
Key would do better by taking a somewhat lower salary and spending the extra cash on staff. Do that, win a couple of more games per year. Then force Tech to pony up real cash in 3 years or jump to Auburn/SC/MissSt/etc after they fire their coach.
 
GTCrew said:
THIS THIS THIS. I hope nobody thinks like Andrew that you overpay him "just because".
Click to expand...

I don't want to overpay him.

My ideal contract for Key would be a lowish base salary ($1-1.5 million sounds right to me) with incentives that take him up to the middle of the pack ($3-4 million) if he's making bowls and winning division titles in his first few years. It would also have a very low buyout so we can cut bait after one or two seasons if he underperforms. On the flip side, if he does well then he doesn't feel like he's been screwed in terms of compensation and both sides can approach a good-faith extension with him having some proven results.

Previously I responded to two proposed contracts:

1) One is a performance based contract where if he wins eleven games and a conference title he is the lowest paid coach in the ACC. "We're serious about winning but you're unproven so we'll only pay you well if you win" makes sense to me. "We're serious about winning but even if you exceed our wildest expectations we don't want to pay you well" makes no sense to me.

2) The other is a non-incentive based contract where the pay is so low it looks like it's a non-P5 coach. It's so low that if I was a recruit I would be questioning what the hell is going on and if the school is really committed to playing P5 football.
 
I don’t want to overpay, but we also don’t need to be in the bottom 3rd of ACC salaries, thats embarrassing and it sends the message that we are cheap-asses that aren’t serious about winning. We need to be smarter on the buyout.
 
THWG247 said:
I don’t want to overpay, but we also don’t need to be in the bottom 3rd of ACC salaries, thats embarrassing and it sends the message that we are cheap-asses that aren’t serious about winning. We need to be smarter on the buyout.
Click to expand...
But we are cheap-asses that aren’t serious about winning.
 
Some of you guys are absolute idiots.

No coach on earth worth a öööö is going to take some heavy performance based contract that pays based on wins. And if Key did take that, he would be looking for the first opportunity elsewhere to jump ship.

GT is not some special unicorn that is going to be able to pay the head coach differently than every other P5 school.
 
It we lowball him and it doesn't work, what coach worth a damn will look at our cheap asses when we need to hire again.

Lowballing anyone just "proves" to the people that already believe we are too cheap to compete that they are right.
 
Diseqc said:
Some of you guys are absolute idiots.

No coach on earth worth a öööö is going to take some heavy performance based contract that pays based on wins. And if Key did take that, he would be looking for the first opportunity elsewhere to jump ship.

GT is not some special unicorn that is going to be able to pay the head coach differently than every other P5 school.
Click to expand...

In general I agree but feel like the situation with Key may be a bit different, given how disastrous the past 3.5 years were and the fact that he probably can't get an HC job elsewhere. That said, if there is a performance based contract, it has to actually pay him well if he performs well. It can't be peanuts as a base and still the lowest paid coach in the conference even if he has our best season in three decades.

Still, by far the most likely contract (and the one that makes the most sense for both sides) is a standard contract paying in line with comparable ACC schools but with a very low buyout.
 
THWG247 said:
I don’t want to overpay, but we also don’t need to be in the bottom 3rd of ACC salaries, thats embarrassing and it sends the message that we are cheap-asses that aren’t serious about winning. We need to be smarter on the buyout.
Click to expand...
Or it's cause we want to pay more but we're broke.

BranMart said:
It we lowball him and it doesn't work, what coach worth a damn will look at our cheap asses when we need to hire again.

Lowballing anyone just "proves" to the people that already believe we are too cheap to compete that they are right.
Click to expand...
If we lowball someone like Key it's mainly to build up the resources to pay the next guy better, which would be communicated to anyone we contact about the job.
If we lowball without some bigger plan, then ya it's what you said.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top