2024 Offseason Coaching Movement

WANTED: Passionate Sycamore Fanatics. That You?

Register NOW to join our community of die-hard Sycamore fans.

Register Log in
4Q_iu said:
Higher than football's has ever been.

Insightful of you to cite a number of non-revenue, aka Olympic sports.

Given their absolute rock bottom position of "costs" for a Div I program - they're still not the drain that football is and will remain.
Click to expand...
You are still a total tool
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
Word on the street that I've heard is that initially, the buyout was set to be $1M, but the White Witch decided that was too much (I cannot believe someone this stupid became a university president) so she had it lowered to $250K.
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
IndyTreeFan said:
Word on the street that I've heard is that initially, the buyout was set to be $1M, but the White Witch decided that was too much (I cannot believe someone this stupid became a university president) so she had it lowered to $250K.
Click to expand...
I dont even know what to say about this. How can someone be so delusional and clueless? Actually, she realized it's likely someone will want him and didn't want the athletic department to have that extra money to increase salaries. She is simply unbelievable....good grief.
 
Last edited:
I wonder how head coaches feel about the "buyout" value set in their contracts? A low value makes the coach more marketable and may, in a counterintuitive way, be desirable by the head coach. If the University insists on a very high buyout clause it is stating we value your contribution AND we want to make it impossible for you to go elsewhere because no one can afford the buyout. This might lead to a rift forming between the coach and the administration.

It looks to me like determining that value could become a bit complex balancing of program, coach and institutional interests.

Thoughts?
 
DyedBlue said:
I wonder how head coaches feel about the "buyout" value set in their contracts? A low value makes the coach more marketable and may, in a counterintuitive way, be desirable by the head coach. If the University insists on a very high buyout clause it is stating we value your contribution AND we want to make it impossible for you to go elsewhere because no one can afford the buyout. This might lead to a rift forming between the coach and the administration.

It looks to me like determining that value could become a bit complex balancing of program, coach and institutional interests.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Buyout isn't a concern for coaches because if another school wants them badly they will pay the buyout. Buyout only backfires if you coach isn't good and then you are stuck with that coach until you can afford the buyout or their contract ends.
 
DyedBlue said:
If the University insists on a very high buyout clause it is stating we value your contribution AND we want to make it impossible for you to go elsewhere because no one can afford the buyout. This might lead to a rift forming between the coach and the administration.

It looks to me like determining that value could become a bit complex balancing of program, coach and institutional interests.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I actually agree that a lower buyout could be a sign that the university and the coach feel they have a good relationship and they don't want him to feel trapped/shackled to the school or a large buyout fee.

At the very least, I'll play devils advocate and not assume that every decision ISU administration makes is based in incompetence or malice.
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
A large buyout means that "we know we likely could lose you to a high major school, but we want them to compensate us for taking you," and the high major wouldn't bat an eye at a large buyout. It also means that we don't want to lose you to a peer-type school, who likely couldn't afford the buyout.

Home and home series with the coach's new school are also frequently part of the buyout clause should a coach leave for a new school.

I'm pretty sure that 90% of the decisions made by ISU administration are totally based on incompetence.
 
IndyTreeFan said:
Word on the street that I've heard is that initially, the buyout was set to be $1M, but the White Witch decided that was too much (I cannot believe someone this stupid became a university president) so she had it lowered to $250K.
Click to expand...
This is similar to what I heard.
 
This may be a dumb questions but if the current president is out in a few months, can the new president come in and resign Sherard Clinkscale and fix this contract blunder? JS will absolutely be in demand. It took serious guts for SC to hire JS in the first place. A big bargaining chip in keeping Schertz would be if we can keep Clinkscale.
 
IndyMitchell said:
This may be a dumb questions but if the current president is out in a few months, can the new president come in and resign Sherard Clinkscale and fix this contract blunder? JS will absolutely be in demand. It took serious guts for SC to hire JS in the first place. A big bargaining chip in keeping Schertz would be if we can keep Clinkscale.
Click to expand...

Stop the madness… I can’t. I won’t. I just don’t have the energy for this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top