Author Topic: ROI  (Read 2265 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 34281
  • "Tacky" -Kietz
    • View Profile
ROI
« on: December 15, 2017, 03:51:52 PM »
We've touched on this before.  How long does it take to get back the money that would have to be spent to be elite at football?

For example, rather than debating Venables or Sean, could Dabo and Brent and that whole staff be had for like $15m-20m/year, while knowing that all that extra expense could be made back and then some through increased revenue eventually?

I have no idea, but I hear how the most elite of elite coaches still aren't getting paid what their market value is for what they bring in.  IF that's true, why not go for the existing BITBs?  Start reallocating whatever big-time donation money is currently allocated for stadium stuff towards buying coaches, and use the revenue that comes in to do the stadium stuff later.

 :dunno:


(Want to get rid of the ad? Register now for free!)

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 25477
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #1 on: December 15, 2017, 05:06:11 PM »
Interesting question. Because we're not in a recruiting hotbed, I think it would cost us more than what market rate is. So Clemson, which is probably top 3 in overall coaching salary, is at $15 million already, so it's probably going to take $20 million plus for that staff. I'd say a proven staff could recoup that investment relatively quickly.

Offline Joker

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1382
  • Resident Play-Hard Chartologist
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2017, 05:23:56 PM »
Here's a couple of good articles on the subject.  In terms of benefit to the university overall, not just the AD, an elite coach is worth every penny.  When you factor in increased enrollment, exposure, etc. it wouldn't take long at all to recoup the investment.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/sec/2017/10/25/nick-saban-underpaid-more-than-11-million-season/794275001/

https://herosports.com/collegefootball/the-value-of-a-head-coach

Offline KITNfury

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5429
  • Eat My Ass Whole
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #3 on: December 15, 2017, 05:42:30 PM »
I don't know the number, because it will change from person to person...But there's a point where more money is irrelevant. They want rings to enrich their legacy. It really becomes about the game. This is true in lots of business. I invest in real estate and there are lots people that own well over $100M in real property, yet continue to play the game when there's no change in lifestyle by continuing the success.

Would a 25% raise (or whatever) be enough to lure elite,proven coaches to k-state? I'm skeptical.
I once blew clove smoke in a guy's face that cut in front of me in the line to KJ's.

Offline Pete

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 23059
  • T-Shirt KSU Football Fan
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #4 on: December 15, 2017, 06:48:19 PM »
Publicly offer to make their all their assistant coaches millionaires and set for life.  Let the assistants sell their HC’s on it.

Offline wetwillie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18898
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2017, 06:49:15 PM »
What's the ROI of your mother?
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline Whisker Biscuit

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #6 on: December 15, 2017, 06:56:27 PM »
What you are missing is that paying $20m or even $50m doesn't GUARANTEE you a NC (or even a winning program for that matter).  If it did, it would be a relatively easy decision.  The ROI on a $20m coaching staff that regularly wins 8-10 games (at KSU) would likely be a large negative number.

Offline WackyCat08

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 51951
  • #FireBradHill!
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #7 on: December 15, 2017, 07:55:50 PM »

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 34281
  • "Tacky" -Kietz
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #8 on: December 15, 2017, 08:56:34 PM »
Sounds like we should try it.  I'd be fine with having our Fatty Fund money rerouted towards the Elite Football Coach Fund with the understanding that KSU would soon have so much money that the library renovations could go forward with the money found in Anderson Hall couch cushions and we'd still get to name the room for Fatty.

Offline manpow5

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1360
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #9 on: December 15, 2017, 09:52:30 PM »
What you are missing is that paying $20m or even $50m doesn't GUARANTEE you a NC (or even a winning program for that matter).  If it did, it would be a relatively easy decision.  The ROI on a $20m coaching staff that regularly wins 8-10 games (at KSU) would likely be a large negative number.

We paid Snyder much less (given we got a little lucky with him) and were getting 9-11 win seasons and look what it did for K-State and the city pf Manhattan... that man has paid for himself ten-fold... imagine what we could do with another 11 wim coach and some more hardware... it's a long term play, but it would at least break even.


To EMAW or Not to EMAW

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 25477
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #10 on: December 15, 2017, 09:54:55 PM »
What you are missing is that paying $20m or even $50m doesn't GUARANTEE you a NC (or even a winning program for that matter).  If it did, it would be a relatively easy decision.  The ROI on a $20m coaching staff that regularly wins 8-10 games (at KSU) would likely be a large negative number.

Are you contending that Urban Meyer or Nick Saban couldn't win here?

Offline Whisker Biscuit

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #11 on: December 16, 2017, 09:12:45 AM »
What you are missing is that paying $20m or even $50m doesn't GUARANTEE you a NC (or even a winning program for that matter).  If it did, it would be a relatively easy decision.  The ROI on a $20m coaching staff that regularly wins 8-10 games (at KSU) would likely be a large negative number.

Are you contending that Urban Meyer or Nick Saban couldn't win here?

Not necessarily but they would be contending with challenges they do not have at Bama or OSU...namely the (lack of) opportunity to hand pick the very best players.  I always chuckle when reading the posts about how Bill can't recruit.  Look no further than the post season player recognition.  His ability to identify and aggregate talent that works in his program is unparalleled.  When you look at the list of "trash" recruits he brings in each year with only a handful of P5 offers among them, it blows me away how, 4-5 years later, several of them are somewhere on the All-Big 12 teams.  Saban and Meyer could obviously attract higher profile players/recruits, but not at the level they can now.  Could they win with a little lower level of talent?   Probably.

Offline mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 30471
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #12 on: December 16, 2017, 09:33:06 AM »
My dude WB has never heard of DITRs

Offline Chingon

  • Master of the Atom
  • Administrator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 13713
    • View Profile
    • goEMAW.com
Re: ROI
« Reply #13 on: December 16, 2017, 09:52:38 AM »
You have to remember that WB believes it's impossible for any coach to do a better job than Bill.  So paying any amount of money is meaningless.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 29050
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #14 on: December 16, 2017, 10:35:09 AM »
LOL at Nick Saban not being able to recruit to Manhattan.

Offline Whisker Biscuit

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #15 on: December 16, 2017, 11:19:26 AM »
LOL at Nick Saban not being able to recruit to Manhattan.

yes that's exactly what i said  :jerk:

So Bama's 2017 recruiting class has 21 commits from AL, FL and LA.  And i guess your point would be that those same players would now choose to play in Manhattan because Saban?  He could obviously recruit quality players, just not to the level that he does now.  I don't think that's even arguable.

Offline Whisker Biscuit

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #16 on: December 16, 2017, 11:21:13 AM »
My dude WB has never heard of DITRs

Yes but where you and some other goEMAW ra-tards make fun of them, i embrace them.  then i watch them garner first team All-Big 12 honors.   :emawkid:

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 29050
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #17 on: December 16, 2017, 11:28:17 AM »
LOL at Nick Saban not being able to recruit to Manhattan.

yes that's exactly what i said  :jerk:

So Bama's 2017 recruiting class has 21 commits from AL, FL and LA.  And i guess your point would be that those same players would now choose to play in Manhattan because Saban?  He could obviously recruit quality players, just not to the level that he does now.  I don't think that's even arguable.

I think it is very arguable. If you want to win championships, you should sign with Nick Saban. It doesn’t matter where he’s working.

Offline joda

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3472
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #18 on: December 16, 2017, 01:31:53 PM »
LOL at Nick Saban not being able to recruit to Manhattan.

yes that's exactly what i said  :jerk:

So Bama's 2017 recruiting class has 21 commits from AL, FL and LA.  And i guess your point would be that those same players would now choose to play in Manhattan because Saban?  He could obviously recruit quality players, just not to the level that he does now.  I don't think that's even arguable.

If Saban was here he’d absolutely still recruit at the same level he does now. The amount of direct flights from MHK to DFW would need to double with all the high profile TX ‘cruits coming in

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 34281
  • "Tacky" -Kietz
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #19 on: December 16, 2017, 01:48:17 PM »
Are you people thinking that we should get Saban rather than Swinney?  I think either would accomplish the goal, but my gut instinct is that it would go smoother with Swinney.

Offline libliblibliblibliblib

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 45858
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #20 on: December 16, 2017, 02:14:09 PM »
Are you people thinking that we should get Saban rather than Swinney?  I think either would accomplish the goal, but my gut instinct is that it would go smoother with Swinney.

Also way younger
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

I think.you.are deep down.a.trans cowboy gravy eater.

Online michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 38189
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #21 on: December 16, 2017, 02:15:01 PM »
Are you people thinking that we should get Saban rather than Swinney?  I think either would accomplish the goal, but my gut instinct is that it would go smoother with Swinney.
Saban's grumpiness is more our style though

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 34281
  • "Tacky" -Kietz
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #22 on: December 16, 2017, 02:23:32 PM »
Are you people thinking that we should get Saban rather than Swinney?  I think either would accomplish the goal, but my gut instinct is that it would go smoother with Swinney.

Also way younger

I've gone back and forth on whether age matters.  Once we do this, it'll probably be copycat'd quickly and we'd have Saban stolen from us and have to buy a new guy anyway.  On he other hand, if we were to commit to paying whatever it takes to keep our guy ($40m/year at some point???), yeah get the younger guy and have a couple DODs.

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 34281
  • "Tacky" -Kietz
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #23 on: December 16, 2017, 02:26:26 PM »
Are you people thinking that we should get Saban rather than Swinney?  I think either would accomplish the goal, but my gut instinct is that it would go smoother with Swinney.
Saban's grumpiness is more our style though

True.  I was looking at it from the perspective of how this would be an outside-the-box way of doing things that will get a lot of criticism from all sides, including internally, and that Swinney might do a better job of handling all that.  But there'd be something to be said for having Saban tell ever-y-one to go eff themselves.

Either way, getting one of them or maybe Urban Meyer is the way to go.

Offline everyone shut up

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1036
  • “On paper, we feel good.”
    • View Profile
Re: ROI
« Reply #24 on: December 16, 2017, 02:35:59 PM »
Isn't Swinney a devout christian? Seems like that would go over huge with the tucks.