Kirby gets a new contract

aeromech said:
not as retarded as automatically renewing
Click to expand...
Not really.
The automatic renewal was effectively a $7mm buyout, with the advantage that you could pay it over a period of several years.

The problem with the Hewitt contract was that $7mm was an insanely large buyout for the time.
 
killerB said:
With 100% certainty there would be CPJ haters that would be mad even though they are GT fans because they'd be so damn pissed that it was CPJ that got GT to the playoffs/championship. You can öööö in a box and slap a guarantee on that. If there's one thing besides mom jokes that this board is good for, it's GT fans bitching about GT successes.
Click to expand...
Except that's not true
 
rghoae said:
Not really.
The automatic renewal was effectively a $7mm buyout, with the advantage that you could pay it over a period of several years.

The problem with the Hewitt contract was that $7mm was an insanely large buyout for the time.
Click to expand...

Didn't the buyout go up with each renewal? Or is that Kirk Ferentz, King of All Iowa's contract I was thinking of?
 
killerB said:
With 100% certainty there would be CPJ haters that would be mad even though they are GT fans because they'd be so damn pissed that it was CPJ that got GT to the playoffs/championship. You can öööö in a box and slap a guarantee on that. If there's one thing besides mom jokes that this board is good for, it's GT fans bitching about GT successes.
Click to expand...

Consider this a lesson that Paul Hewitt taught us.
 
Yukonwreck said:
Dabo
Click to expand...
Dabo'd have to love mother Bama an awful lot to be that stupid.

Why go from someplace where you can and do win nat'l championships, and where you and you alone are the guy that brought the team out of the wilderness, and are beloved by all... to a place where success is a birthright and you're following the greatest coach who ever lived?
 
18in32 said:
Dabo'd have to love mother Bama an awful lot to be that stupid.

Why go from someplace where you can and do win nat'l championships, and where you and you alone are the guy that brought the team out of the wilderness, and are beloved by all... to a place where success is a birthright and you're following the greatest coach who ever lived?
Click to expand...
I know, but Pepper left UCLA and he had to know the pitfalls.
 
If you paid Kirby a million a year and used the rest to play 85 players and 15 walkons they could get $60,000 apiece. This is what is wrong with the current system. Kirby gets 7 mill and players get a scholarship. Add to that all of the athletic department staff and assistant coaches that get good money while the athletes get a scholarship. The cash cow has milk because of their play. But, the milk goes elsewhere.
 
77GTFan said:
If you paid Kirby a million a year and used the rest to play 85 players and 15 walkons they could get $60,000 apiece. This is what is wrong with the current system. Kirby gets 7 mill and players get a scholarship. Add to that all of the athletic department staff and assistant coaches that get good money while the athletes get a scholarship. The cash cow has milk because of their play. But, the milk goes elsewhere.
Click to expand...
I agree with you on that. But long ago a wise man said to me,

6a00d83451c0aa69e201b7c753f86d970b-600wi
 
77GTFan said:
If you paid Kirby a million a year and used the rest to play 85 players and 15 walkons they could get $60,000 apiece. This is what is wrong with the current system. Kirby gets 7 mill and players get a scholarship. Add to that all of the athletic department staff and assistant coaches that get good money while the athletes get a scholarship. The cash cow has milk because of their play. But, the milk goes elsewhere.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but that makes absolutely no sense. Or rather, it made sense to Marx and the Politburo, but it doesn't make sense to Americans.

How did you decide Kirby should get a $1,000,000 and the players $60,000 apiece? You picked those numbers because... why? They seem "fair"? We have a market that decides how much to pay people. And there are a heckuva lot of talented athletes happy to play at UGA for just the scholarship. Ain't nobody holding a gun to their heads to make them play.

People who think it's "unfair" for someone else to get paid less... rarely sacrifice their own money to make things "fair." That's the essence of liberalism: doing good deeds with somebody else's money. Who among us gives up a pay raise so that our deserving colleagues can get it instead?
 
77GTFan said:
If you paid Kirby a million a year and used the rest to play 85 players and 15 walkons they could get $60,000 apiece. This is what is wrong with the current system. Kirby gets 7 mill and players get a scholarship. Add to that all of the athletic department staff and assistant coaches that get good money while the athletes get a scholarship. The cash cow has milk because of their play. But, the milk goes elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Almond milk
Cow milk is nasty
Fluid from the teet of another animal
 
18in32 said:
I'm sorry, but that makes absolutely no sense. Or rather, it made sense to Marx and the Politburo, but it doesn't make sense to Americans.

How did you decide Kirby should get a $1,000,000 and the players $60,000 apiece? You picked those numbers because... why? They seem "fair"? We have a market that decides how much to pay people. And there are a heckuva lot of talented athletes happy to play at UGA for just the scholarship. Ain't nobody holding a gun to their heads to make them play.

People who think it's "unfair" for someone else to get paid less... rarely sacrifice their own money to make things "fair." That's the essence of liberalism: doing good deeds with somebody else's money. Who among us gives up a pay raise so that our deserving colleagues can get it instead?
Click to expand...

We may have a market somewhere out there trying to decide what to pay NCAA athletes, but it isn't functioning very well at all. The players don't get paid zero dollars because that's what the invisible hand has weighed for them, it's because the last time they got paid non-zero dollars, a regulatory actor intervened by destroying an entire football conference. The value of athlete services is clearly in the multi-million dollar range at the very top level of FBS, or Clemson and its competitors wouldn't be spending multi-millions "on" them by building private indoor water slides and offering a byzantine array of other expensive perks for being a top tier athlete.

I think we should allow that market to fully function and determine whether cash payments are appropriate, and/or what other form compensation should take, on its own. Then, when 98% of the players still get paid nothing except a scholarship, we can yell at the socialists who are still trying to make things fair. There's nothing politburo about that.
 
18in32 said:
I'm sorry, but that makes absolutely no sense. Or rather, it made sense to Marx and the Politburo, but it doesn't make sense to Americans.

How did you decide Kirby should get a $1,000,000 and the players $60,000 apiece? You picked those numbers because... why? They seem "fair"? We have a market that decides how much to pay people. And there are a heckuva lot of talented athletes happy to play at UGA for just the scholarship. Ain't nobody holding a gun to their heads to make them play.

People who think it's "unfair" for someone else to get paid less... rarely sacrifice their own money to make things "fair." That's the essence of liberalism: doing good deeds with somebody else's money. Who among us gives up a pay raise so that our deserving colleagues can get it instead?
Click to expand...

Eh. The problem with your analysis is that the players aren't part of the free market. Actually, they are barred from entering the free market and forced into an artficial, managed economy. It's pretty darn socialist, too. Guys who never see the field make the same as blue chip, future NFL first rounders.

I dunno if paying college players is the answer. Ideally, there should be true minor league professional football for guys who have no interest in a college education. This is probably a less likely outcome than just paying players, though. College ball is just too big.
 
Last edited:
“Eh. The problem with your analysis is that the players aren't part of the free market. Actually, they are barred from entering the free market and forced into an artficial, managed economy. It's pretty darn socialist, too. Guys who never see the field make the same as blue chip, future NFL first rounders.

I dunno if paying college players is the answer. Ideally, there should be true minor league professional football for guys who have no interest in a college education. This is probably a less likely outcome than just paying players, though. College ball is just too big.”

—-> XFL could be that market... NO? Just a thought, why go to college when you could jump from High School to the XFL league and get paid for you service without the hassle of “schoolwork”? If you are great the NFL will come knocking on your door and try to sway you with a possible big pay day. Free market rules! Just my 2 cents though
 
killerB said:
With 100% certainty there would be CPJ haters that would be mad even though they are GT fans because they'd be so damn pissed that it was CPJ that got GT to the playoffs/championship. You can öööö in a box and slap a guarantee on that. If there's one thing besides mom jokes that this board is good for, it's GT fans bitching about GT successes.
Click to expand...

On the other side there is the larger group of "Tech fans" who rush to defend this coach and his scheme no matter how many times we lose to Puke, miss bowls, and have losing seasons. These people are Scheme First, School Second fans who'd love to see us abandon the forward pass altogether and play nothing but a heavy rotation of service academies.

They chant "It Is What It Is" 100x every night before falling asleep, dreaming of chop blocking and perfectly-executed B-back dive plays.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top