GDT SLU vs Da Rams

[WestCoastBilliken]

The budget will have nothing to do with Crews staying or leaving.

Thats good to know. I didnt think that would be the case. My guess is that SLU will fire Crews at the end of the season, and then cheap out on the next coach.

We will see.

[cheeseman]

The budget will have nothing to do with Crews staying or leaving.

You are correct. Keep in mind that they may hire a young coach for less money than Crews is making but I would not call that going cheap. There are plenty of young dynamic coaches who would love to be at SLU in the A10 and would do so for a big raise for them but would not need 850K to do so.

[Billiken Law]

As a casual fan, I don't see the motivation for Crews to retire, since he has two more years on his contract, at $850K per. And, I don't see anyone on the horizon who is willing to fund the buyout for SLU. The contract extension was a bad decision (as we now see); the Billikens, I fear, are stuck with Crews, for at least one more year. Maybe someone will step forward to buy out one year, but not two. Just my two cents.

Where are people getting the idea that terminating Crews would mean paying the remainder of the contract? Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if the buyout were rather minimal, such as less than one year. It isn't as if Crews had a ton of leverage to demand such a clause when he was hired. In fact, it was the administration that had all of the leverage in negotiations which to me indicates the buyout will be much less.

[Clock_Tower]

As a casual fan, I don't see the motivation for Crews to retire, since he has two more years on his contract, at $850K per. And, I don't see anyone on the horizon who is willing to fund the buyout for SLU. The contract extension was a bad decision (as we now see); the Billikens, I fear, are stuck with Crews, for at least one more year. Maybe someone will step forward to buy out one year, but not two. Just my two cents.

Highly unlikely the buyout is 100% of contract price.

Also, whatever money is owed to Crews is owed to Crews. But SLU basketball finances are dynamic, not static. TV revenues, advetising and ticket sales can and will go down even further if we endure another season of effortless futilely. SLU leadership can make a bad situation worse thru inaction. We still have NCAA Tourny revenues and a $1 billion endowment. Money can be found even assuming no bailout by Noevelly and Chaifetz.

[Clock_Tower]

Where are people getting the idea that terminating Crews would mean paying the remainder of the contract? Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if the buyout were rather minimal, such as less than one year. It isn't as if Crews had a ton of leverage to demand such a clause when he was hired. In fact, it was the administration that had all of the leverage in negotiations which to me indicates the buyout will be much less.

+1

And there was no contract extension. Just the original contract which we should have never done.

[TheChosenOne]

The budget will have nothing to do with Crews staying or leaving.

I would also hope that there is some thought given to what the loss of revenue would look like over the next two seasons with Crews as our head coach. Focusing just on the buyout and potential increase in salary of a new coach would be a lazy margin analysis.

As other's have said above, people are likely overestimating what the buyout would be. It is likely his base salary over the next two seasons not his all in salary which includes incentives which would not be collected if fired. I assume that buyout would be around $300k per season. I didn't disagree with the decision to sign Crews even though I thought he would fail long-term since I felt like our hand was forced a bit with the success his initial team had, but giving him a 5 year deal was surprising to me. With us going 5 years, I assumed that we had some favorable buyout clauses in there.