Join A Grassroots Movement for Change of AD and MBB Coach

[billikenfan05]

1 minute ago, cheeseman said:

Ford's contract is what in business they call "sunk money".  We already have lost it now the question is only do we continue to put good money in a bad deal?  Of course, the answer is no but for some reason some have the idea that it is OK to do this when it comes to Ford's contract.  Additionally, even getting Ford to agree to lower his salary which is highly unlikely, just so that money could be used for NIL payments has one major problem - Ford would still be here and he would then be spending the money on who knows who.  It makes no sense to let the incompetent continue to stay in place and make more incompetent decisions.  Ford is the perfect example of "The Peter Principal".  Time to cut bait and move forward rather than treading water and slipping farther down the current.

I just want to throw out there that my idea is totally hypothetical in which I am in Travis' position after last seasons disappointment in no way do I think SLU would or could convince Travis Ford to lower his salary.

[DOC]

This is an absolute no brainer for Ford. SLU is his last relevant coaching job. This way he keeps that job and keeps his assistants employed and stays in a city he loves. I’m gonna to need some of that Tate money back as well. 

[johnbj14]

Hypothetically, Ford could donate his entire 2.5 million dollar salary to the BVF and coach for free, and I’d still have 0 confidence in his ability to make it work here. We’ve seen him squander multiple talented teams and continue to have the same faults. It’s time for both parties to move on. 

[Soderball]

13 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:

I just want to throw out there that my idea is totally hypothetical in which I am in Travis' position after last seasons disappointment in no way do I think SLU would or could convince Travis Ford to lower his salary.

Ford is far more interested in the cash. I will be living in St Louis long after Ford has headed back to Kentucky or wherever.

(edit: i wouldn't give money back to my employer either. the idea that somehow Ford cares so much about SLU hoops that he would give back any of the cash in his accounts is crazy. Dude is here to get paid, nothing more and nothing less. He is a mercenary.)

[willie]

2 hours ago, johnbj14 said:

A portion of the endowment is not liquid. SLU’s endowment is used for disbursements for designated funds, but the endowment serves a large purpose as collateral for debt issuances that they use to finance capital projects like new dorms or academic buildings. 

This is a good point. SLU's debt is I believe AA rated.This is a very good rating allowing the school to borrow at lower rates. I am sure the Endowment is a large part of the rating. 

[Cowboy II]

2 hours ago, billikenfan05 said:

So you doubt that I would make that decision? It's the easiest decision I'd ever make.

-okay, in this fantasy scenario I will take your word for it

-next time you talk to him ask CFord if he is donating to BVF

[JohnnyJumpUp]

On 1/2/2024 at 1:09 PM, billikenfan05 said:

I would call his cocking his fist at his players to be an overly emotional response bordering into assault but that's just me. 

Assault is a stretch man.... look around the NCAA, I bet there are more that act like that than don't, Izzo is one who immediately comes to mind. Not always a bad thing.

 

[billikenfan05]

6 minutes ago, JohnnyJumpUp said:

Assault is a stretch man.... look around the NCAA, I bet there are more that act like that than don't, Izzo is one who immediately comes to mind. Not always a bad thing.

 

I’ll defer to you given your criminal history. But I don’t like it from any of the coaches. 

[billiken_roy]

1 hour ago, cheeseman said:

Ford's contract is what in business they call "sunk money".  We already have lost it now the question is only do we continue to put good money in a bad deal?  Of course, the answer is no but for some reason some have the idea that it is OK to do this when it comes to Ford's contract.  Additionally, even getting Ford to agree to lower his salary which is highly unlikely, just so that money could be used for NIL payments has one major problem - Ford would still be here and he would then be spending the money on who knows who.  It makes no sense to let the incompetent continue to stay in place and make more incompetent decisions.  Ford is the perfect example of "The Peter Principle".  Time to cut bait and move forward rather than treading water and slipping farther down the current.

i agree with this.  lowering his salary increases the chances he doesnt get fired and will stay even longer than the 3 or 4 more years he is under contract.  !  i dont want him here any longer than necessary.   i just pray one of the whales comes forward and puts him out of our misery.  

[JMM28]

Ford will take his buyout - probably in some sort of present value lump sum - and go one of two ways. I could see him getting a solid role as a studio guy for a sports network. The only coaching job I could see him at would be a 250k-400k a year lower major job. He has already made generational wealth as a coach though, so he'd really have to want to keep coaching. 

[Cowboy II]

29 minutes ago, JMM28 said:

Ford will take his buyout - probably in some sort of present value lump sum - and go one of two ways. I could see him getting a solid role as a studio guy for a sports network. The only coaching job I could see him at would be a 250k-400k a year lower major job. He has already made generational wealth as a coach though, so he'd really have to want to keep coaching. 

-I interpret this as you thinking he knows the game and could impart his wisdom to the viewing audience but can't as a coach get his players to understand the game he wants them to play

 

[cheeseman]

1 hour ago, JMM28 said:

Ford will take his buyout - probably in some sort of present value lump sum - and go one of two ways. I could see him getting a solid role as a studio guy for a sports network. The only coaching job I could see him at would be a 250k-400k a year lower major job. He has already made generational wealth as a coach though, so he'd really have to want to keep coaching. 

Help me to understand - is a present value lump sum the full value of the remaining years on his contract?  If so, what is the point of us doing that.  We can pay him each year remaining during that year rather than pony all of it up at one time (unless I am confused about your post).  Normally if you negotiate a settlement for the coach to leave and be free to work anywhere even on a sports network he takes less for his freedom.  If you are paying him his full amount over the remaining years then technically/legally, he is your employee therefore not free to work anywhere else.  You can assign him to be anywhere but here but not allow him to work any place else.

[Soderball]

1 hour ago, Cowboy II said:

-I interpret this as you thinking he knows the game and could impart his wisdom to the viewing audience but can't as a coach get his players to understand the game he wants them to play

 

He was a good player, he knows the game. He knows what he's watching on the court. He just can't teach the game, or recruit guys that he can teach. Somewhere something along the teaching line isn't clicking, and the last two years his ability to bring talented players has fallen off a cliff.

[JMM28]

2 hours ago, cheeseman said:

Help me to understand - is a present value lump sum the full value of the remaining years on his contract?  If so, what is the point of us doing that.  We can pay him each year remaining during that year rather than pony all of it up at one time (unless I am confused about your post).  Normally if you negotiate a settlement for the coach to leave and be free to work anywhere even on a sports network he takes less for his freedom.  If you are paying him his full amount over the remaining years then technically/legally, he is your employee therefore not free to work anywhere else.  You can assign him to be anywhere but here but not allow him to work any place else.

We don't know the exacts of his contract, but lets say he is owed 2.4 million over the next 3 years. He might have a clause that says it is all due on termination, though. If not, SLU just has to keep paying him that over the next 3 years. Lets assume there is offset language in there so if he gets a job at WIU making 200k, SLU only has to pay 2.2 million each year. It may be in everyones best interest to negotiate a settlement that buys that next 3 years out for an amount less than the 7.2 million owed. Travis gets the money up front to invest or throw a big party or whatever. He also gets rid of the offsets so if he can get 300k to coach somewhere, it is an additional 300k not just the same 2.4 coming to him. SLU gets it off their books at a reduced rate for paying him in cash up front. Maybe, in this example, the right number is 6,250,000. 

But again - not knowing a damn thing about the language in his contract. 

[JMM28]

3 hours ago, Cowboy II said:

-I interpret this as you thinking he knows the game and could impart his wisdom to the viewing audience but can't as a coach get his players to understand the game he wants them to play

 

Kind of. I think he'd make a good talking head from his 20+ years experience at various level, his playing days at UK, and his folksy banter. I think it would be hard for a guy to go from OkSt to SLU to a low major level or assistant for anyone else at any level. 

[Lord Elrond]

8 minutes ago, JMM28 said:

We don't know the exacts of his contract, but lets say he is owed 2.4 million over the next 3 years. He might have a clause that says it is all due on termination, though. If not, SLU just has to keep paying him that over the next 3 years. Lets assume there is offset language in there so if he gets a job at WIU making 200k, SLU only has to pay 2.2 million each year. It may be in everyones best interest to negotiate a settlement that buys that next 3 years out for an amount less than the 7.2 million owed. Travis gets the money up front to invest or throw a big party or whatever. He also gets rid of the offsets so if he can get 300k to coach somewhere, it is an additional 300k not just the same 2.4 coming to him. SLU gets it off their books at a reduced rate for paying him in cash up front. Maybe, in this example, the right number is 6,250,000. 

But again - not knowing a damn thing about the language in his contract. 

It’s a good general summary you gave, but you’re also right that without knowing what’s in his contract, it’s very hard to say much specifically.

[MusicCityBilliken]

6 hours ago, TheA_Bomb said:

Agree non-revenue sports are doing alright. However, I think the gross negligence of Ford's contract is enough in itself to warrant a change of AD.

Really think so?

Other than MSOC & WSOC none the other non revenue teams (men's and women) can compete on a national level. We are in the A10, a big difference than the old CUSA and Great Midwest. The only thing that counts is win that season ending tourney. Even if we do win a A10 non-revenue season ending tourney (which does not happen often, UD and VCU seem to do well in that regard), we are a high seed and out in the first round.

BTW: it was discussed here the possibility of moving to the AAC. It would be a disaster for the non-revenue teams.

[Soderball]

44 minutes ago, JMM28 said:

Kind of. I think he'd make a good talking head from his 20+ years experience at various level, his playing days at UK, and his folksy banter. I think it would be hard for a guy to go from OkSt to SLU to a low major level or assistant for anyone else at any level. 

Rick Pitino went from Louisville to coaching a club team in Greece and then to Iona and back up to the job he really wanted at St. John's

 

Will Wade went from LSU to McNeese State

 

Romar went from Pepperdine to SLU to Washington to back to Pepperdine.

 

A lot of these guys stop when they drop dead or are too outdated or not good enough to keep a position.

I turned on some OVC play the other day and found MARTY SIMMONS still on a bench.

[TheA_Bomb]

9 minutes ago, MusicCityBilliken said:

Really think so?

Other than MSOC & WSOC none the other non revenue teams (men's and women) can compete on a national level. We are in the A10, a big difference than the old CUSA and Great Midwest. The only thing that counts is win that season ending tourney. Even if we do win a A10 non-revenue season ending tourney (which does not happen often, UD and VCU seem to do well in that regard), we are a high seed and out in the first round.

BTW: it was discussed here the possibility of moving to the AAC. It would be a disaster for the non-revenue teams.

W Soccer is doing very well. Women's BB did better than ever. Yes it's not as competitive conference as previously but you gotta beat the teams in front of you.

Men Soccer mixed results.

Baseball mixed results but better than before (perhaps due to competition level).

We did have a runner at the NCAA Track and Field National Championship last year.

So it's just alright. 

I'm not unreasonable this is not Stanford or Texas. 

[MusicCityBilliken]

16 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

W Soccer is doing very well. Women's BB did better than ever. Yes it's not as competitive conference as previously but you gotta beat the teams in front of you.

I said WSOC can compete, I mentioned MSOC based on last year. Also, it has potential the other non-revenue teams don't have on advancing deep in the NCAAs.  Also May did hire McGinty, who we suffered 7 seasons with. Women's BB, can we expect more seasons like it was last season or was it just an aberration? Will see. I like Tillet, hopefully she has more success. I was not big fan of Pizzotti and Shimey but they both had to deal with stronger conferences and the West Pine Gym. The West Pine Gym did not even have a ladies room. Women's Vball was better prior to May. Even with the West Pine Gym. Field Hockey, why do we even bother to compete in this sport?  Give them a on-campus facility for heavens sake. 

Baseball mixed results but better than before (perhaps due to competition level).

About every 4 or 5 years we win the A10 Tourney. We are not dominant even with a weak A10. BTW, Hendrickson was here prior to May.

We did have a runner at the NCAA Track and Field National Championship last year.

Okay

So it's just alright.

Even for A10 standards, I think it's below mediocre. VCU and Dayton pick up far more championships in non-revenue sports.

 

 

 

[billikenfan05]

53 minutes ago, MusicCityBilliken said:

 

I don't think that's true at all, if I'm being honest. VCU has a great WT&F program and baseball. Dayton dominated VB until Loyola arrived. SLU has owned WSOC. All 3 have not recently been in the championship picture for S&D, softball, FH. I think Dayton is okay at XC/T&F. SLU has 4 A10 regular season championships to 1 a piece for the other two and Dayton only has 1 tournament crown. Dayton has had great WBB success in the regular season but VCU, UD and SLU all have 1 A10 championship in the last 5 years. Dayton also kinda stinks now. VCU is a mid program that will punch up every handful of years. VCU has had tennis success, to what extent I don't care to look up other than I know a singles player went to individual NCAAs

[Soderball]

AD CM lost the bronze boot to my SIUE Cougars and y'all want to keep him?

My how the mighty have fallen.

He lost the bronze boot. Fire Chris May.

[cgeldmacher]

23 hours ago, JMM28 said:

It isn't 400k. It is 500k++. It comes from about as knowledgable as you can get and not be named Travis or Fred. Like any donor funded initiative, it is that now but could change by 2 pm if someone gets pissed and pulls their support or adds another 100k on top because they had a good year at the dog track. 

You'll never have evidence of what BVF has, sorry. No NIL collectives are really publishing what they're doing financially. They'll publicize cars, deals with companies, etc, but you won't get the actual payouts to players. There is a lot of bull**** floating around out there about all these deals which is what keeps it interesting. 

It sounds like you have source that can be trusted.  Next question though.  Is that $500K+ that is in there now, or $500K+ for each year, meaning we expect to have $2M+ over the next four years?

[cgeldmacher]

23 hours ago, cheeseman said:

Ford's contract is what in business they call "sunk money".  We already have lost it now the question is only do we continue to put good money in a bad deal?  Of course, the answer is no but for some reason some have the idea that it is OK to do this when it comes to Ford's contract.  Additionally, even getting Ford to agree to lower his salary which is highly unlikely, just so that money could be used for NIL payments has one major problem - Ford would still be here and he would then be spending the money on who knows who.  It makes no sense to let the incompetent continue to stay in place and make more incompetent decisions.  Ford is the perfect example of "The Peter Principle".  Time to cut bait and move forward rather than treading water and slipping farther down the current.

Again, I have to be careful here, I don't disagree.  However, just saying it is a sunk cost is not altogether true.  If we let Ford go and have to pay the rest of his deal, then we have to do that and pay a new coach.  A new coach will want to be paid.  A good new coach, the kind we would want, will want to be paid more than some other options.  If we have a certain amount of money allocated to the head coaching position, and we have to use that money to pay the new coach and Ford, then we may not be able to afford the type of coach we want.  It's easy to throw out a business school term like sunk cost as a way to justify not having any limits on spending, but the practicalities of situation do not necessarily line up.

I don't know the details about Ford's contract or what it would take to buy it out.  I would assume that the people in charge and the big donors who are flipping the tab for our head coaches contract are very, very aware of all of this.  I guarantee they are strategizing about this and crunching the numbers.  The goal is to have the best coach put into the best position to succeed.  I don't want to change anything until it is certain that the finances work out for this to occur.  Like I said, the people that need to know this already do.

[Soderball]

1 hour ago, cgeldmacher said:

Again, I have to be careful here, I don't disagree.  However, just saying it is a sunk cost is not altogether true.  If we let Ford go and have to pay the rest of his deal, then we have to do that and pay a new coach.  A new coach will want to be paid.  A good new coach, the kind we would want, will want to be paid more than some other options.  If we have a certain amount of money allocated to the head coaching position, and we have to use that money to pay the new coach and Ford, then we may not be able to afford the type of coach we want.  It's easy to throw out a business school term like sunk cost as a way to justify not having any limits on spending, but the practicalities of situation do not necessarily line up.

I don't know the details about Ford's contract or what it would take to buy it out.  I would assume that the people in charge and the big donors who are flipping the tab for our head coaches contract are very, very aware of all of this.  I guarantee they are strategizing about this and crunching the numbers.  The goal is to have the best coach put into the best position to succeed.  I don't want to change anything until it is certain that the finances work out for this to occur.  Like I said, the people that need to know this already do.

Dude i'm pretty sure a damp rag would do a better job than Ford at this point. booooo