Nate Latsch Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 I've been thinking about this for a couple days and wanted to get some opinions on here. Would it be a wise investment to lure a big-name basketball coach to a school that otherwise doesn't have much name recognition on a national level? I'm not talking about St. Louis U. or any other school in particular. Just kind of a hypothetical for discussion purposes. Minnesota went out and threw a ton of money at Tubby Smith, nearly as much as he was making per season at Kentucky. There are rumors that Kentucky will make Billy Donovan the highest paid coach in college hoops. What if a school with little name recognition went after someone like Billy D? Obviously it would cost several million dollars a year, but wouldn't it also generate money? You could make money with filling the basketball arena, selling merchandise, a shoe contract, more student admissions, boosters making more contributions, TV deals, etc. Anybody have any thoughts on this? - Nate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 try proving it to the bean counters. my guess is that unless a booster or a set of boosters guarantees to underwrite that salary, it aint gonna happen. in kentucky's situation, they already have a track record up to a certain level so they dont have to convince the bean counters of as much. but take tiny xyz university that has never paid a 7 figure salary before, those bean counters arent going to pony up that salary. accountants are not visionaries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 You could make money with: Filling the basketball arena >Ticket sales are generally a very small portion of total revenue Selling merchandise >Only if you win A shoe contract >How much would the school get More student admissions >In the case of SLU, they already have more applications than they do spots Boosters making more contributions >Again, if you win. TV deals >Your TV deal is predicated on your conference. I would guess that most private schools and most schools without an existing athletic tradition would have a really hard time getting a multimillion-dollar coaching contract past their boards of trustees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MusicCityBilliken Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 The only way I see it is Brad or some future asst. coach we hire gets into the promise land (several NCAA bids with us going on to the sweet sixteen for at least one of these)that we pony up big bucks. I don't care how much money we throw on the table we will not attract a Donavon or a Tubby Smith being a non BCS school. We would have to do what Marquette did with Crean and I am sure CU is now doing with Altman. Also, for another reason specific to SLU, I don't see it happening now with our new arena debt (even with the donated $12 mil and other donations). I am sure building the arena is like having a custom house built. When I built mine, even though we had a price with the contractor, it seemed I never put away my check book till I was residing in the place. I called it the money pit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NashvilleBilliken Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Even if they could somehow find the money for the salary, that doesn't really do much for you. It depends on who we're talking about here, but I doubt many of these lesser known schools have the $$ to build that kind of program. Just having a coach isn't gonna help much. You still need the players. So, you need a premier practice facility and arena. You need nice athletic dorms and meal plans. You need to create the atmosphere of a high major school. No high $$ coach would accept less and neither do the players. It's a good idea, but I don't think it's feasible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StLouBlue Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 I don't think a current big name coach would go to a small time school. A program that is a BCS school, but just not producing, maybe but not a non-BCS school. Non-producing BCS schools like Nebraska, Colorado, Baylor, Northwestern, S Florida, St Johns, etc, all could have the ability to lure away a big coach, but generally the big names would say no thanks. KSU with Huggins could be the best/most recent example of a non-producing BCS school getting a big name coach, it will be interesting to see how that all plays out yet. Tubby to Minnesota probably also fits this as well. Both U Minn & KSU will be paying a lot out, but should probably make it back if their programs start winning. I think Georgia State could be an example when they hired Lefty Driesell and went on a very nice run. I don't know much of the history of Georgia State but I would guess those years with Lefty were probably the best they had and certainly helped put them on the college basketball map for a few years. Wasn't it Cleveland St that hired Rollie Massaminio(spelling?) also. I don't remember much success happening there though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VTIME Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 The coach will get the players. Guys like Huggins and Calipari will always get the players. Huggins got Beasley and Walker, to come to K-State. Both those guys were top 5 in their class most of their HS tenure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MusicCityBilliken Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Didn't Lefty come from James Madison? Rememeber he was let go from Maryland. Same with Rollie, who pulled a Spoon from Nova and ended up going then abruptly leaving UNLV for Cleveland. Tarheel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kahok Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 There are other positives also from hiring a big name coach. Boosters will pony up a large chunk of the salary. But it also forces other schools in your conference to upgrade because then they start competing with you. They hire better coaches, the conference gets better, then the revenues from television starts to increase, this leads to more money for the athletic budget, which leads to better recruiting, which leads to more exposure. If SLU could entice a big name coach to come build a program does anybody believe these things would not happen. Each team in a conference builds to compete in their conference, so you raise the bar and others will follow suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUMS81 Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 In my line of work, I receive dozens of solicitations per year from headhunter services trying to find qualified personnel to fill jobs in less desirable communities. These offers are virtually all considerably more lucrative than my current job. The reason why headhunters are needed is because of the location of the job and the perceived lack of prestige or glamor associated with the position. The salary/benefits package alone is not enough to attract qualified people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STLfan Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 Here is some evidence that having a good basketball program can help the school. This is from 03 but it should prove that a good basketball team helps the university. http://www.marquette.edu/omc/newsroom/news/pr41403.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 >Here is some evidence that having a good basketball program >can help the school. This is from 03 but it should prove >that a good basketball team helps the university. > >http://www.marquette.edu/omc/newsroom/news/pr41403.shtml Try an updated version for 2007..keeps going up and up. http://www.marquette.edu/omc/newsroom/news...einDemand.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xudash Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 >You could make money with: >Filling the basketball arena >>Ticket sales are generally a very small portion of total revenue > >Selling merchandise >>Only if you win > >A shoe contract >>How much would the school get > >More student admissions >>In the case of SLU, they already have more applications than they do spots > >Boosters making more contributions >>Again, if you win. > >TV deals >>Your TV deal is predicated on your conference. > >I would guess that most private schools and most schools >without an existing athletic tradition would have a really >hard time getting a multimillion-dollar coaching contract >past their boards of trustees. Good reply except for the TV part. Conference affiliation is only a factor in the event there is a relevant conference TV package, or not (we all know where that stands with Bruno and the A10). The point is that Xavier has its own TV deal with FoxSports Ohio, as many of you know. Thank God, too. We will not leave our fate in the hands of those idiots in Philly. Interesting thread though. A little "out of the box" thinking. I like it. Imagine a sufficiently wealthy school with a known strong fan base - a fan base that would react quickly and strongly to victories - taking this direction. It is a "prime the pump" kind of approach. Media attention and immediate fan interest - curiosity - would come into play right out of the gate if the right guy were brought into the mix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 Wow. Sounds really impressive until you actually dissect the numbers. For 2005-2006: Marquette Total applicants: 10,348 Total acceptances: 7,257 Total freshman enrollment: 1,784 SAT scores (25/75 percentile): Verbal: 540 – 650 Math: 540 – 660 Combined: 1080 – 1310 ACT scores (25/75 percentile): English: 24 – 30 Math: 24 – 28 Composite: 24 – 29 SLU Total applicants: 8,105 Total acceptances: 6,310 Total freshman enrollment: 1,521 SAT scores (25/75 percentile): Verbal: 550 – 650 Math: 550 – 670 Combined: 1100 – 1320 ACT scores (25/75 percentile): English: 23 – 30 Math: 23 – 29 Composite: 24 – 29 Statistically, it's at best a wash, with maybe a slight edge to our basketball-challenged alma mater on total quality of freshman class. And let's not even get started on how much basketball success has actually benefitted SIUC. Bonus points to anyone who can accurately attribute the "liars, damned liars and statisticians" (or "lies, damned lies and statistics") quotation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 >Wow. Sounds really impressive until you actually dissect the >numbers. For 2005-2006: > >Marquette >Total applicants: > 10,348 >Total acceptances: > 7,257 >Total freshman enrollment: > 1,784 > >SAT scores (25/75 percentile): >Verbal: > 540 – 650 >Math: > 540 – 660 >Combined: > 1080 – 1310 > >ACT scores (25/75 percentile): >English: > 24 – 30 >Math: > 24 – 28 >Composite: > 24 – 29 > >SLU >Total applicants: > 8,105 >Total acceptances: > 6,310 >Total freshman enrollment: > 1,521 > >SAT scores (25/75 percentile): >Verbal: > 550 – 650 >Math: > 550 – 670 >Combined: > 1100 – 1320 > >ACT scores (25/75 percentile): >English: > 23 – 30 >Math: > 23 – 29 >Composite: > 24 – 29 > >Statistically, it's at best a wash, with maybe a slight edge >to our basketball-challenged alma mater on total quality of >freshman class. > >And let's not even get started on how much basketball >success has actually benefitted SIUC. > >Bonus points to anyone who can accurately attribute the >"liars, damned liars and statisticians" (or "lies, damned >lies and statistics") quotation. Joe, the comparison was Marquette to Marquette. Not SLU to Marquette. Marquette's number of applicants has passed 13,000 people,(quite impressive) yet they aren't increasing the number of spots in the Freshman class, thus increasing their competition. You also omitted any stats on other aspects of their applications(back in 05) besides test scores...including other aspects of academics, geography, economic and culural diversity and other statistical comparisons of Marquette applicants then vs Marquette applicants now and so on....and their trend of number of applicants and quality of applicants and diversity of applicants is very impressive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 Then you'd also have to compare SLU to SLU for the same time period to see what increase has occured in SLU's number and quality of freshman class. Anecdotally, I'd guess you'd see the same thing -- two Jesuit Universities riding the tide of overall demographics. One did it with an accompanying elevation of its basketball success, one without. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 "I'd guess you'd see the same thing -- two Jesuit Universities riding the tide of overall demographics." I think that's the biggest factor. This year, there will be 3.2 million kids graduating from high school, as compared to 2.4 million when I graduated in 1993. Lots more competition for the top schools, which is having a trickle-down effect that benefits schools like SLU and Marquette. Harvard turned down 1,100 applicants with perfect math scores on the SAT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glanderm Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 I think it's popularly attributed to Twain (though he may have attributed it to someone else)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 Correct on both (he attributed it to Disraeli). But it doesn't appear that anyone has ever found a primary source illustrating that Disraeli actually said it. Ever heard of J.A. Baines? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glanderm Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 No I had not, though a Google search of J.A. Baines turned this up: http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/maths/histstat/lies.htm Sounds like Baines may have been quoting someone else as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stchuckbilliken Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 This is a great discussion. I did a quick calculation just on the attendance differences from Spoonhour's best years compared to the attendance for the last two years. The attendance difference between 95, 96 and 05, 06 is 8673/gm. Given 16 games/year at $15 per seat gives us $2,081,520 extra per year. Add in the extra revenue streams, just in the NCAA tourny if a team wins two games they get approx 1/2 mil, you could get $10 - $15 mil extra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 >Then you'd also have to compare SLU to SLU for the same time >period to see what increase has occured in SLU's number and >quality of freshman class. Anecdotally, I'd guess you'd see >the same thing -- two Jesuit Universities riding the tide of >overall demographics. One did it with an accompanying >elevation of its basketball success, one without. You'd guess wrong Joe. Even in numbers alone, which is merely one part of the story, Marquette's applications increased approx 25% more than SLU's in same time period since the numbers you posted. In the past 5 years Marquette's applications increased approx 75%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorB Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 The quote is from Mr. Mark Twain; in the sense that he popularized it. This is an interesting thread. I wish to know more about it, and I do have my doubts about the extent to which Marquette's basketball success has improved the students there, or brought in additional funding/support. I also think sometimes people forget that $$$ from any sports program goes into a pie that feeds all of the sports teams at a school. Most of these other, smaller programs lose money, teams like the swimming team, tennis, golf, volleyball, whatever. Higher ed. is non-profit. the only people really making $$ are the overpaid coaches, I think. It is conceivable that the school makes out better with contributions, but since they are from sports-fanatics, it is debatable how much that money actually helps the school. And SLU proves that a school can raise $80 million or whatever for a stadium for a basketball program that has not proven very successful in recent years. One other point--SLU is doing the right thing, I think, in capping enrollment levels over the 10 years I have been here. It has gone up a bit but keeping it in the 1500-1600 range is probably a really good idea. The point is that rising enrollment figures really do not impress most educators. Retention, for example, is much more important. We do, however, want to attract better qualified students; and in general I can tell you that at SLU we are doing that. Probably so is Marquette; but is it related to success in basketball?? Dubious . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorB Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 ps -- bonwich is a man after my own heart! the best source on the web for this topic is: www.twainquotes.com specifically, here is the full quote: Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Autobiography of Mark Twain www.twainquotes.com/Statistics.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glanderm Posted April 5, 2007 Share Posted April 5, 2007 "Higher ed. is non-profit." Do you really think that's the case (I'm really asking - please don't read any sarcasm into my question)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.