ricejacket
Damn Good Rat
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 1,496
The buyout gradually reducesThe numbers seems to match lower end of ACC pay, which makes sense. I would have preferred the buyout reducing by year 2 or year 3 for an interim coach promotion, but not surprising from how Tech does contracts...
I'm fine with Key, but I think it's clear now we weren't in the hunt for Chadwell, Mullen, Deion, any big name coach.
I'm fine with Key, but I think it's clear now we weren't in the hunt for Chadwell, Mullen, Deion, any big name coach.
I'm fine with Key, but I think it's clear now we weren't in the hunt for Chadwell, Mullen, Deion, any big name coach.
Didn't Colorado only give 5M for assistantsI'm not sure we can assume that. Let's say for the sake of argument we could've afforded Chadwell at $4 million a year but decided not to for whatever reason. Maybe we actually liked Key better. That doesn't mean we then have to pay Key even close to that much. He clearly has much less of a resume as well as no comparable options for leverage.
I do think we can probably safely say we were not in the hunt for Deion at $6 million a year though lol. Colardo doesn't even know how they're going t ocome up with the money yet.
It now officially makes sense why we didn't attempt a coaching search. 2.8 is the bottom of the ACC.
“We should hire Key because he’ll take a team friendly deal that lets us pay more assistants”It now officially makes sense why we didn't attempt a coaching search. 2.8 is the bottom of the ACC.
It’s not just a stingtalk thing. Other Tech fans also say stupid öööö like this.“We should hire Key because he’ll take a team friendly deal that lets us pay more assistants”
Key takes team friendly deal
“WE WERENT EVEN GOING TO PAY A REAL COACH”
@OlearyLookAlike you got some splaining to do
So, you’d be happy if we paid Brent Key $15M per year? We’d be #1, right?It now officially makes sense why we didn't attempt a coaching search. 2.8 is the bottom of the ACC.