Rumors

GTLiebs said:
Pretty sure he definitely started with a lower salary than Johnson. I think it's spose to go up every year but I remember reading that the average across the 7 might still be less than Johnson made his last year. Also pretty sure within the ACC he's like 7th out of 8 public schools for head coach salaries.
Click to expand...
Nope. Collins’ 2019 salary was $3 million, same as Johnson’s 2018 salary. Collins’ 2019 staff made $400k more than Johnson’s 2018 staff, a 14 percent increase.
 
cbee said:
Maybe to you but not to me. The point is, in my opinion, for $3.2 per year (probably a lot less) we could have done so much better. It is not a low salary that makes our coach a bad coach.
Click to expand...
He’s paid in the bottom 25% of power 5 and you’re getting bottom 25% results. You think $3.2mm is a lot but it’s actually very low. Those are facts.
 
Ed Sawyer said:
Nope. Collins’ 2019 salary was $3 million, same as Johnson’s 2018 salary. Collins’ 2019 staff made $400k more than Johnson’s 2018 staff, a 14 percent increase.
Click to expand...
"Georgia Tech coach Geoff Collins’ seven-year contract averages $3.3 million and begins at $3 million for the 2019 season, about $152,000 less than former coach Paul Johnson was scheduled to make in this coming season. Collins’ pay will increase by $100,000 over the life of his seven-year contract, finishing at $3.6 million in 2025."
So we both got things wrong. Last year was the first year he made more than Johnson would of in 2019, though who knows if it was more than Johnson would of made in 2020. The average is indeed more than what Johnson would of made in 2019, but it ain't 30% higher either.
As for the rest, you were originally talking about Collins vs Johnson, not the staffs. That or your first comment wasn't clear enough.
 
Where does he stack up in terms of pay per win amongst other P5 coaches?
 
gtgtgt1 said:
Is it though? Honest question
Click to expand...
I mean, it's a stat just to make the argument of "Collins is ripping us off!" cause no öööö it's going to be high with 3 win seasons. It's a meaningless stat that tells us nothing we don't already know: that Collins and co have done a bad job.
 
GTLiebs said:
Does still go to show a part of what we're competing with where Big10 mediocre and below teams are outspending us by a fair bit, but in this particular case it's likely more about differences in conference monies.
Click to expand...

Swofford: the gift that keeps on giving. Namely to his son at Raycom, and now presumably Bally's.
 
cbee said:
I would like to know why the AD thought Collins would be a good head coach. If there were a history from which to surmise that, ok, but there wasn't. So why would you give an unproven coach 7 years? The last 3 years have proven that it wasn't worth that risk. I would be accepting if the AD could explain what sold him on Collins if it were something other than the BS we hear in every press conference.
Click to expand...
*Per my prior email* the 7 years is meaningless unless you take into account the front-loading/back-loading distinction. In other words, both sides will be evaluating the contract in terms of guaranteed dollars, not length of contract. The timeline is not long enough for time-value/interest rates to matter very much.

If this doesn't make sense, let me try explaining it differently.... A coach would be happy to take $12m guaranteed his first year, and $1m per year for every subsequent year. That puts the most money in his pocket as quickly as possible. OTOH, the AD would prefer $1m per year and $12m in the final year. That gives him more time to raise money, and also gives him a chance at avoiding payment if the coach violates the agreement.

So the *length* of the contract is not per se relevant unless you also talk about the overall guaranteed dollars. If CGC accepted a lower per year amount initially, it shouldn't raise eyebrows that he got a longer contract. The dollars would be the same.

And I have no idea what "unproven" HC's were getting in 2019 when he was hired. Do you have any evidence he was paid more than other "unproven" HC's were paid? From what I can glean from posts around here... his pay is near the bottom of the ACC and P5 spectrum.

As far as I can tell, the animosity towards TStan should be solely about hiring a bad coach, not about paying him too much.
 
AlabamaBuzz said:
Brent Key will jump ship, in my opinion. I don’t think we are losing that much. If he was “great”, Sa(t)an could have easily paid him to stay. I could be wrong, but he already came close once.
Click to expand...
He needs to. He can’t coach his position. The OL is worse than the play calling.
 
cbee said:
Here is my take, and only that. Collins is the problem. Until the right people acknowledge that, we are going to be seeing more embarrassing performances while he pitches his culture.
Click to expand...

Its likely Collins' schtick is why we suck on the field but it is also likely why we have recruited OK. The rumors so far seem to understand that.

"The right people" can see that almost certainly. What they can also see is financials.

We have two options. Can everyone and start all over. With big buyouts on Collins plus most assistants on a two year contract thats a lot of money. What is left to hire the new staff? Probably only enough for a Gregory type bargain basement hire.

The other option is to hire new coordinators on two year contracts to match the staff contracts. Assuming Collins will let them do their job, we should see immediate improvement. Collins can keep doing his schtick out on the recruiting trail. It has to be clear that if our play does not improve under the new coordinators AND recruiting does not continue to do well then it would be clear that Collins is failing at his job and would be fired. At any time.
 
BainbridgeJacket said:
Let's review a few hypotheticals. Initial premise is that you have enough boosters lined up to pay the buyout as we presumably did.
1) pay the buyout, salary pool relatively unchanged. New coaching candidates will all request budgets above what our finances allow, more support staff than the already increased numbers we've added.
2) convince a portion of the donors that we use the difference between buyout next year and now to increase the coaching salary pool. Some bite, some don't, so you're able to increase salary pool by ~1.5-2 million for next year. You hire new coordinators with the intention that 1 of them will be the replacement if things don't turn around. This gets you a better hire than you otherwise would for the coordinators. Your new coordinators will want to turn over their staff, so most of the six won't be back (maybe 1 retained, depending on the coordinators we get). Key moves on to another role probably for his own good. Choice may as well.


That all said, I don't trust TStan to make the right hires for #2, but it's a reasonable approach on paper if your starting assumption is that the culture we've built is a good one.
Click to expand...
IMHO ...Losing Culture is never a good one!
 
GTCrew4b said:
In my opinion recruiting actually needs to get better. Getting a little tired of these camp/drill studs that aren’t football players.
Click to expand...

Recruiting is just speculation. It's wrong if what manifests is 3 wins per season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top