Fogler

[commavegarage]

I don't understand why a school goes cheap on a coach.

Without getting into true P/L vs actual P/L (the gain from having a good basketball program), don't all our programs run at a loss save for the football program? And don't we cover those losses with our endowment? If our endowment is 1.8 bil (which in actuality it is much more at this point with market appreciation & any donations), at the margin whats the difference between 1 mil (for paying for this assclown) and 3 mil for paying for a top coach? And that doesn't include all the additional inflow in the form of ticket sales & donations that would come with hiring a big time coach.

Am I missing something here? Please point it out if so.

[pick6pedro]

Hearing that we had Wright's interest and not ponying up another 10-20% of the offer is awful. WTF is the difference? I don't consider being willing to match/barely up his salary to be cheap, though. I consider not upping the ante stupid and probably stubborn in an "all things equal, if you don't want to be here, then shove it" type of way.

It's cheap because you aren't looking for the best coach... you are looking for a bargain. My guess is that it came from the BOT member who got a seat by pledging millions for a stadium he knew would ever be built. Essentially, it is an attempt to get the benefits of being a spender without actually having to lay down a dime.

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova looking for a bargain?

because if you're going to offer him a filet o'fish, it should come with a premium rather than a straight trade

but it's not a straight trade. you're offering a filet o'fish from a franchise with a realiable history, not from one whose ingredients are known to be slipping in quality.

If you are going to make a move, why just take a slightly better filet o'fish? Why not get something much, much, much better... like prime rib.

so you can ignore my questions but I have to answer yours?

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova "looking for a bargain"?

[pick6pedro]

Hearing that we had Wright's interest and not ponying up another 10-20% of the offer is awful. WTF is the difference? I don't consider being willing to match/barely up his salary to be cheap, though. I consider not upping the ante stupid and probably stubborn in an "all things equal, if you don't want to be here, then shove it" type of way.

It's cheap because you aren't looking for the best coach... you are looking for a bargain. My guess is that it came from the BOT member who got a seat by pledging millions for a stadium he knew would ever be built. Essentially, it is an attempt to get the benefits of being a spender without actually having to lay down a dime.

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova looking for a bargain?

because if you're going to offer him a filet o'fish, it should come with a premium rather than a straight trade

but it's not a straight trade. you're offering a filet o'fish from a franchise with a realiable history, not from one whose ingredients are known to be slipping in quality.

don't know if you've checked the sign lately but the latest sanitation grade posted in conte is a "C" at best. i'm sure he's fine to maintain with his low "A" for the same money that it would take to elbow grease the "C" especially since the "C" has been reinforced over a several year period

you are not defining franchise the same way I was defining franchise.

[MaroonNGold]

Will someone give PROOF that Wright was interested and came here and interviewed?

[Logitano]

Hearing that we had Wright's interest and not ponying up another 10-20% of the offer is awful. WTF is the difference? I don't consider being willing to match/barely up his salary to be cheap, though. I consider not upping the ante stupid and probably stubborn in an "all things equal, if you don't want to be here, then shove it" type of way.

It's cheap because you aren't looking for the best coach... you are looking for a bargain. My guess is that it came from the BOT member who got a seat by pledging millions for a stadium he knew would ever be built. Essentially, it is an attempt to get the benefits of being a spender without actually having to lay down a dime.

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova looking for a bargain?

because if you're going to offer him a filet o'fish, it should come with a premium rather than a straight trade

but it's not a straight trade. you're offering a filet o'fish from a franchise with a realiable history, not from one whose ingredients are known to be slipping in quality.

don't know if you've checked the sign lately but the latest sanitation grade posted in conte is a "C" at best. i'm sure he's fine to maintain with his low "A" for the same money that it would take to elbow grease the "C" especially since the "C" has been reinforced over a several year period

you are not defining franchise the same way I was defining franchise.

Being willing to spend over two and a quarter million for a hoops coach is not going after a guy for a bargain. The point I guess is that winning the press conference by paying Jay Wright at least $2.75 million was not on our agenda and as a Knicks fan I have witnessed a lot of Ws at press conferences not turn out to be great for the franchise. I am willing to give this guy a chance. Hated the process and not a fan of the outcome but other than Spaz always willing to give a BC coach the chance.

[HJS]

I don't understand why a school goes cheap on a coach.

Without getting into true P/L vs actual P/L (the gain from having a good basketball program), don't all our programs run at a loss save for the football program? And don't we cover those losses with our endowment? If our endowment is 1.8 bil (which in actuality it is much more at this point with market appreciation & any donations), at the margin whats the difference between 1 mil (for paying for this assclown) and 3 mil for paying for a top coach? And that doesn't include all the additional inflow in the form of ticket sales & donations that would come with hiring a big time coach.

Am I missing something here? Please point it out if so.

BC makes $XXX from the ACC whether they win or they lose. There are only a few ways the athletic department can improve their profits... one is to increase ticket revenues (and ancillary things like concessions and licensing for gear)... the other is cutting expenses. For BC, the ideal is to pay the lowest amount of money to generate the highest amount of revenues from tix/concenssions/licensing. Since coaches salary is a big part of the expenses, they would want a dollar-for-dollar return on the money they laid down on a top-end coach. As such, they were willing to pay-up to get an elite coach... but not willing to overpay (which was needed to get him).

What is not contemplated in this analysis is any unrelated benefits gleaned from having a winning program (media attention, donations, better admissions, etc.). These benefits are often questioned (and undoubtedly are by our POS BOT). The way some at BC probably look at the hire is that we just saved ourselves $1mm a year by hiring Christian... and we still get the exact same amount of money from the ACC. They simply have no incentive to be anything but a last place program. When we made the move to the ACC, many (including me) thought that with the additional money we could compete at an even higher level. Instead, the guaranteed revenue in the eyes Leahy and the BOT meant that we could stop trying.

The truth is that it isn't really a terrible business approach. However, if conference reallignment ever happens again... the BOT's short-sightedness just sacrificed the expected steady cashflow.

[commavegarage]

I don't understand why a school goes cheap on a coach.

Without getting into true P/L vs actual P/L (the gain from having a good basketball program), don't all our programs run at a loss save for the football program? And don't we cover those losses with our endowment? If our endowment is 1.8 bil (which in actuality it is much more at this point with market appreciation & any donations), at the margin whats the difference between 1 mil (for paying for this assclown) and 3 mil for paying for a top coach? And that doesn't include all the additional inflow in the form of ticket sales & donations that would come with hiring a big time coach.

Am I missing something here? Please point it out if so.

BC makes $XXX from the ACC whether they win or they lose. There are only a few ways the athletic department can improve their profits... one is to increase ticket revenues (and ancillary things like concessions and licensing for gear)... the other is cutting expenses. For BC, the ideal is to pay the lowest amount of money to generate the highest amount of revenues from tix/concenssions/licensing. Since coaches salary is a big part of the expenses, they would want a dollar-for-dollar return on the money they laid down on a top-end coach. As such, they were willing to pay-up to get an elite coach... but not willing to overpay (which was needed to get him).

What is not contemplated in this analysis is any unrelated benefits gleaned from having a winning program (media attention, donations, better admissions, etc.). These benefits are often questioned (and undoubtedly are by our POS BOT). The way some at BC probably look at the hire is that we just saved ourselves $1mm a year by hiring Christian... and we still get the exact same amount of money from the ACC. They simply have no incentive to be anything but a last place program. When we made the move to the ACC, many (including me) thought that with the additional money we could compete at an even higher level. Instead, the guaranteed revenue in the eyes Leahy and the BOT meant that we could stop trying.

The truth is that it isn't really a terrible business approach. However, if conference reallignment ever happens again... the BOT's short-sightedness just sacrificed the expected steady cashflow.

it makes all the sense in the world from a business approach.

but I wouldn't treat the school as if it's a business.

[pick6pedro]

I don't understand why a school goes cheap on a coach.

Without getting into true P/L vs actual P/L (the gain from having a good basketball program), don't all our programs run at a loss save for the football program? And don't we cover those losses with our endowment? If our endowment is 1.8 bil (which in actuality it is much more at this point with market appreciation & any donations), at the margin whats the difference between 1 mil (for paying for this assclown) and 3 mil for paying for a top coach? And that doesn't include all the additional inflow in the form of ticket sales & donations that would come with hiring a big time coach.

Am I missing something here? Please point it out if so.

BC makes $XXX from the ACC whether they win or they lose. There are only a few ways the athletic department can improve their profits... one is to increase ticket revenues (and ancillary things like concessions and licensing for gear)... the other is cutting expenses. For BC, the ideal is to pay the lowest amount of money to generate the highest amount of revenues from tix/concenssions/licensing. Since coaches salary is a big part of the expenses, they would want a dollar-for-dollar return on the money they laid down on a top-end coach. As such, they were willing to pay-up to get an elite coach... but not willing to overpay (which was needed to get him).

What is not contemplated in this analysis is any unrelated benefits gleaned from having a winning program (media attention, donations, better admissions, etc.). These benefits are often questioned (and undoubtedly are by our POS BOT). The way some at BC probably look at the hire is that we just saved ourselves $1mm a year by hiring Christian... and we still get the exact same amount of money from the ACC. They simply have no incentive to be anything but a last place program. When we made the move to the ACC, many (including me) thought that with the additional money we could compete at an even higher level. Instead, the guaranteed revenue in the eyes Leahy and the BOT meant that we could stop trying.

The truth is that it isn't really a terrible business approach. However, if conference reallignment ever happens again... the BOT's short-sightedness just sacrificed the expected steady cashflow.

You both keep using the word cheap like it fits. they weren't going cheap. They were unwilling to go the extra dollar over what they (and others) considered at least fair value. Which is exactly what I was getting at. No one is questioning the ancilliary benefits or arguing saying the logic BC uses to decide whether to go the extra dollar is faulty. A lawyer would have known this 20 posts ago.

[HJS]

Hearing that we had Wright's interest and not ponying up another 10-20% of the offer is awful. WTF is the difference? I don't consider being willing to match/barely up his salary to be cheap, though. I consider not upping the ante stupid and probably stubborn in an "all things equal, if you don't want to be here, then shove it" type of way.

It's cheap because you aren't looking for the best coach... you are looking for a bargain. My guess is that it came from the BOT member who got a seat by pledging millions for a stadium he knew would ever be built. Essentially, it is an attempt to get the benefits of being a spender without actually having to lay down a dime.

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova looking for a bargain?

because if you're going to offer him a filet o'fish, it should come with a premium rather than a straight trade

but it's not a straight trade. you're offering a filet o'fish from a franchise with a realiable history, not from one whose ingredients are known to be slipping in quality.

If you are going to make a move, why just take a slightly better filet o'fish? Why not get something much, much, much better... like prime rib.

so you can ignore my questions but I have to answer yours?

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova "looking for a bargain"?

Sorry you couldn't understand my prime rib comment.

Jay Wright would make a lot more in the open market than what Nova currently pays him. Based on the salaries of other top coaches, Jay Wright is a bargain for Nova. BC wanted Jay Wright... but only at the same hometown discount (i.e. BC was looking for the same bargain Jay Wright gave Nova).

[HJS]

I don't understand why a school goes cheap on a coach.

Without getting into true P/L vs actual P/L (the gain from having a good basketball program), don't all our programs run at a loss save for the football program? And don't we cover those losses with our endowment? If our endowment is 1.8 bil (which in actuality it is much more at this point with market appreciation & any donations), at the margin whats the difference between 1 mil (for paying for this assclown) and 3 mil for paying for a top coach? And that doesn't include all the additional inflow in the form of ticket sales & donations that would come with hiring a big time coach.

Am I missing something here? Please point it out if so.

BC makes $XXX from the ACC whether they win or they lose. There are only a few ways the athletic department can improve their profits... one is to increase ticket revenues (and ancillary things like concessions and licensing for gear)... the other is cutting expenses. For BC, the ideal is to pay the lowest amount of money to generate the highest amount of revenues from tix/concenssions/licensing. Since coaches salary is a big part of the expenses, they would want a dollar-for-dollar return on the money they laid down on a top-end coach. As such, they were willing to pay-up to get an elite coach... but not willing to overpay (which was needed to get him).

What is not contemplated in this analysis is any unrelated benefits gleaned from having a winning program (media attention, donations, better admissions, etc.). These benefits are often questioned (and undoubtedly are by our POS BOT). The way some at BC probably look at the hire is that we just saved ourselves $1mm a year by hiring Christian... and we still get the exact same amount of money from the ACC. They simply have no incentive to be anything but a last place program. When we made the move to the ACC, many (including me) thought that with the additional money we could compete at an even higher level. Instead, the guaranteed revenue in the eyes Leahy and the BOT meant that we could stop trying.

The truth is that it isn't really a terrible business approach. However, if conference reallignment ever happens again... the BOT's short-sightedness just sacrificed the expected steady cashflow.

You both keep using the word cheap like it fits. they weren't going cheap. They were unwilling to go the extra dollar over what they (and others) considered at least fair value. Which is exactly what I was getting at. No one is questioning the ancilliary benefits or arguing saying the logic BC uses to decide whether to go the extra dollar is faulty. A lawyer would have known this 20 posts ago.

Seems like using the term "cheap" has really hit a nerve with Pedro. Just saying...

[BCMurt09]

Wait, the Jay Wright stuff was real?

I do enjoy this board.

Was there even one mention outside of twb's mentions about Jay Wright?

BC923 kept saying it but I thought he was just backing my gambit.

I know it showed up in a Blauds article too but you know... Blauds.

There were also the two April Fools articles on the VU and BC sportsnation affiliates.

most references over the past week to steve lappas were thinly veiled discussions of jay wright. he did visit campus, did entertain an offer and then; when he didn't get hsi number, walked away. i was energized by this move/possibility thinking we might actually try to do something... and then BAM the bc ballkick. i don't know why i ever believe.

tedwardo - i thought you were actually in the know as well until you kept pushing your wright agenda after it was clear he was out

I always know a situation is dire when TRE drops the snark and posts his true feelings. It's like seeing a parent cry.

[angrychicken]

Seems like using the term "cheap" has really hit a nerve with Pedro. Just saying...

...says the guy who just went halfsies on a Filet O' Fish value meal with Blauds.

[pick6pedro]

Hearing that we had Wright's interest and not ponying up another 10-20% of the offer is awful. WTF is the difference? I don't consider being willing to match/barely up his salary to be cheap, though. I consider not upping the ante stupid and probably stubborn in an "all things equal, if you don't want to be here, then shove it" type of way.

It's cheap because you aren't looking for the best coach... you are looking for a bargain. My guess is that it came from the BOT member who got a seat by pledging millions for a stadium he knew would ever be built. Essentially, it is an attempt to get the benefits of being a spender without actually having to lay down a dime.

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova looking for a bargain?

because if you're going to offer him a filet o'fish, it should come with a premium rather than a straight trade

but it's not a straight trade. you're offering a filet o'fish from a franchise with a realiable history, not from one whose ingredients are known to be slipping in quality.

If you are going to make a move, why just take a slightly better filet o'fish? Why not get something much, much, much better... like prime rib.

so you can ignore my questions but I have to answer yours?

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova "looking for a bargain"?

Sorry you couldn't understand my prime rib comment.

Jay Wright would make a lot more in the open market than what Nova currently pays him. Based on the salaries of other top coaches, Jay Wright is a bargain for Nova. BC wanted Jay Wright... but only at the same hometown discount (i.e. BC was looking for the same bargain Jay Wright gave Nova).

I've adressed that already as well, it's a shame you can't add 2 and 2.

[pick6pedro]

I don't understand why a school goes cheap on a coach.

Without getting into true P/L vs actual P/L (the gain from having a good basketball program), don't all our programs run at a loss save for the football program? And don't we cover those losses with our endowment? If our endowment is 1.8 bil (which in actuality it is much more at this point with market appreciation & any donations), at the margin whats the difference between 1 mil (for paying for this assclown) and 3 mil for paying for a top coach? And that doesn't include all the additional inflow in the form of ticket sales & donations that would come with hiring a big time coach.

Am I missing something here? Please point it out if so.

BC makes $XXX from the ACC whether they win or they lose. There are only a few ways the athletic department can improve their profits... one is to increase ticket revenues (and ancillary things like concessions and licensing for gear)... the other is cutting expenses. For BC, the ideal is to pay the lowest amount of money to generate the highest amount of revenues from tix/concenssions/licensing. Since coaches salary is a big part of the expenses, they would want a dollar-for-dollar return on the money they laid down on a top-end coach. As such, they were willing to pay-up to get an elite coach... but not willing to overpay (which was needed to get him).

What is not contemplated in this analysis is any unrelated benefits gleaned from having a winning program (media attention, donations, better admissions, etc.). These benefits are often questioned (and undoubtedly are by our POS BOT). The way some at BC probably look at the hire is that we just saved ourselves $1mm a year by hiring Christian... and we still get the exact same amount of money from the ACC. They simply have no incentive to be anything but a last place program. When we made the move to the ACC, many (including me) thought that with the additional money we could compete at an even higher level. Instead, the guaranteed revenue in the eyes Leahy and the BOT meant that we could stop trying.

The truth is that it isn't really a terrible business approach. However, if conference reallignment ever happens again... the BOT's short-sightedness just sacrificed the expected steady cashflow.

You both keep using the word cheap like it fits. they weren't going cheap. They were unwilling to go the extra dollar over what they (and others) considered at least fair value. Which is exactly what I was getting at. No one is questioning the ancilliary benefits or arguing saying the logic BC uses to decide whether to go the extra dollar is faulty. A lawyer would have known this 20 posts ago.

Seems like using the term "cheap" has really hit a nerve with Pedro. Just saying...

Using it wrongly to masturbate over a situation we all hate is what hit a nerve. mo, mo, mo the quotes...

[HJS]

Hearing that we had Wright's interest and not ponying up another 10-20% of the offer is awful. WTF is the difference? I don't consider being willing to match/barely up his salary to be cheap, though. I consider not upping the ante stupid and probably stubborn in an "all things equal, if you don't want to be here, then shove it" type of way.

It's cheap because you aren't looking for the best coach... you are looking for a bargain. My guess is that it came from the BOT member who got a seat by pledging millions for a stadium he knew would ever be built. Essentially, it is an attempt to get the benefits of being a spender without actually having to lay down a dime.

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova looking for a bargain?

because if you're going to offer him a filet o'fish, it should come with a premium rather than a straight trade

but it's not a straight trade. you're offering a filet o'fish from a franchise with a realiable history, not from one whose ingredients are known to be slipping in quality.

If you are going to make a move, why just take a slightly better filet o'fish? Why not get something much, much, much better... like prime rib.

so you can ignore my questions but I have to answer yours?

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova "looking for a bargain"?

Sorry you couldn't understand my prime rib comment.

Jay Wright would make a lot more in the open market than what Nova currently pays him. Based on the salaries of other top coaches, Jay Wright is a bargain for Nova. BC wanted Jay Wright... but only at the same hometown discount (i.e. BC was looking for the same bargain Jay Wright gave Nova).

I've adressed that already as well, it's a shame you can't add 2 and 2.

You have not addressed anything. You specifically haven't addressed what Jay Wright would make on the open market. It's a shame you do not understand supply and demand... though not at all surprising.

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

that accounting concept of "market value" is "price that a third party would pay you for your product/service"

based on this concept and the available evidence at hand, i would suggest that jay wright's market value is what the wildcats are paying him. as no one has offered more, there is no evidence to suggest his market value is higher.

while he may percieve that his market value is higher... he has no proof of that value. between you and i, this would NOT be the first instance of someone thinking they are worth more than someone is willing to pay them

[pick6pedro]

Hearing that we had Wright's interest and not ponying up another 10-20% of the offer is awful. WTF is the difference? I don't consider being willing to match/barely up his salary to be cheap, though. I consider not upping the ante stupid and probably stubborn in an "all things equal, if you don't want to be here, then shove it" type of way.

It's cheap because you aren't looking for the best coach... you are looking for a bargain. My guess is that it came from the BOT member who got a seat by pledging millions for a stadium he knew would ever be built. Essentially, it is an attempt to get the benefits of being a spender without actually having to lay down a dime.

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova looking for a bargain?

because if you're going to offer him a filet o'fish, it should come with a premium rather than a straight trade

but it's not a straight trade. you're offering a filet o'fish from a franchise with a realiable history, not from one whose ingredients are known to be slipping in quality.

If you are going to make a move, why just take a slightly better filet o'fish? Why not get something much, much, much better... like prime rib.

so you can ignore my questions but I have to answer yours?

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova "looking for a bargain"?

Sorry you couldn't understand my prime rib comment.

Jay Wright would make a lot more in the open market than what Nova currently pays him. Based on the salaries of other top coaches, Jay Wright is a bargain for Nova. BC wanted Jay Wright... but only at the same hometown discount (i.e. BC was looking for the same bargain Jay Wright gave Nova).

I've adressed that already as well, it's a shame you can't add 2 and 2.

You have not addressed anything. You specifically haven't addressed what Jay Wright would make on the open market. It's a shame you do not understand supply and demand... though not at all surprising.

According to the story presented, he was willing to take the "hometown discount"+10-20% or so...which is not "much, much, much better" (in other words, what you feel he could garner on the open market)...and was even pondering a move without the +10-20%. Your "much, much, much better" is simply a mo technique of exaggerating the distance between what he wanted versus what BC was willing to give.

[MilitantEagle]

Hearing that we had Wright's interest and not ponying up another 10-20% of the offer is awful. WTF is the difference? I don't consider being willing to match/barely up his salary to be cheap, though. I consider not upping the ante stupid and probably stubborn in an "all things equal, if you don't want to be here, then shove it" type of way.

It's cheap because you aren't looking for the best coach... you are looking for a bargain. My guess is that it came from the BOT member who got a seat by pledging millions for a stadium he knew would ever be built. Essentially, it is an attempt to get the benefits of being a spender without actually having to lay down a dime.

How is paying Wright what he makes at Nova looking for a bargain?

because if you're going to offer him a filet o'fish, it should come with a premium rather than a straight trade

but it's not a straight trade. you're offering a filet o'fish from a franchise with a realiable history, not from one whose ingredients are known to be slipping in quality.

don't know if you've checked the sign lately but the latest sanitation grade posted in conte is a "C" at best. i'm sure he's fine to maintain with his low "A" for the same money that it would take to elbow grease the "C" especially since the "C" has been reinforced over a several year period

you are not defining franchise the same way I was defining franchise.

Being willing to spend over two and a quarter million for a hoops coach is not going after a guy for a bargain. The point I guess is that winning the press conference by paying Jay Wright at least $2.75 million was not on our agenda and as a Knicks fan I have witnessed a lot of Ws at press conferences not turn out to be great for the franchise. I am willing to give this guy a chance. Hated the process and not a fan of the outcome but other than Spaz always willing to give a BC coach the chance.

Well said Logitano.

[pick6pedro]

that accounting concept of "market value" is "price that a third party would pay you for your product/service"

based on this concept and the available evidence at hand, i would suggest that jay wright's market value is what the wildcats are paying him. as no one has offered more, there is no evidence to suggest his market value is higher.

while he may percieve that his market value is higher... he has no proof of that value. between you and i, this would NOT be the first instance of someone thinking they are worth more than someone is willing to pay them

And on top of this you have mo spinning Wright's perceived value higher than where the supposed evidence has Wright valuing himself - in order to (gasp!) promote his agenda.

[commavegarage]

Getting Wright wouldn't have been a winning the press conference move. NBA and NCAA are non-comparable.

An NCAA head coach (that is not under the rule of Gene) is the owner, president, gm & head coach of the team. He doesn't have a bumbling idiot pulling the strings behind the curtain the way the knicks have had.

[HJS]

that accounting concept of "market value" is "price that a third party would pay you for your product/service"

based on this concept and the available evidence at hand, i would suggest that jay wright's market value is what the wildcats are paying him. as no one has offered more, there is no evidence to suggest his market value is higher.

while he may percieve that his market value is higher... he has no proof of that value. between you and i, this would NOT be the first instance of someone thinking they are worth more than someone is willing to pay them

If you bought a townhouse in Williamsburg 10 years ago for $1mm, it doesn't mean that the market value is still $1mm. You would derive the market value base on what comparable homes in the area sold for in recent years. Relaying that to the world of coaches, you can get an idea what a coach would be worth on the open market based on amount similar coaches have recently received. While getting accurate numbers on coaches is often very difficult, I believe Memphis pays Josh Pastner 2.65 and Oklahoma State pasy Travis Ford $2.5. Even Ed Cooley's weird hair gets paid $2mm from Providence. I think that there is a strong likelihood Jay Wright that a third party would happily pay Jay Wright more than his current Villanova contract. My guess is that his flirtation with BC means that we will likely have that answer within the next 12 months.

[Nate2651]

I don't understand why a school goes cheap on a coach.

Without getting into true P/L vs actual P/L (the gain from having a good basketball program), don't all our programs run at a loss save for the football program? And don't we cover those losses with our endowment? If our endowment is 1.8 bil (which in actuality it is much more at this point with market appreciation & any donations), at the margin whats the difference between 1 mil (for paying for this assclown) and 3 mil for paying for a top coach? And that doesn't include all the additional inflow in the form of ticket sales & donations that would come with hiring a big time coach.

Am I missing something here? Please point it out if so.

BC makes $XXX from the ACC whether they win or they lose. There are only a few ways the athletic department can improve their profits... one is to increase ticket revenues (and ancillary things like concessions and licensing for gear)... the other is cutting expenses. For BC, the ideal is to pay the lowest amount of money to generate the highest amount of revenues from tix/concenssions/licensing. Since coaches salary is a big part of the expenses, they would want a dollar-for-dollar return on the money they laid down on a top-end coach. As such, they were willing to pay-up to get an elite coach... but not willing to overpay (which was needed to get him).

What is not contemplated in this analysis is any unrelated benefits gleaned from having a winning program (media attention, donations, better admissions, etc.). These benefits are often questioned (and undoubtedly are by our POS BOT). The way some at BC probably look at the hire is that we just saved ourselves $1mm a year by hiring Christian... and we still get the exact same amount of money from the ACC. They simply have no incentive to be anything but a last place program. When we made the move to the ACC, many (including me) thought that with the additional money we could compete at an even higher level. Instead, the guaranteed revenue in the eyes Leahy and the BOT meant that we could stop trying.

The truth is that it isn't really a terrible business approach. However, if conference reallignment ever happens again... the BOT's short-sightedness just sacrificed the expected steady cashflow.

I dont think the BC admin does a good job as is evident but the fact that they put $0 into facilities upgrades. That being said if what you are saying is true why woouldnt they just have kept Donahue.

[HJS]

I don't necessarily think the ones who pushed for the firing were the ones who also put a cap on what BC could spend on Wright (or any other candidates). I wouldn't at all be surprised if they pushed for more, but were rebuffed by others on the BOT (possibly even Leahy). I think once Wright passed, they were essentially out in the woods without much of a plan. It should be noted that while word is that we came up short financially for Wright, making a play for a big name is never all that easy. They could've been rejected for any number of reasons (i.e. their daughter is still in high school). To not have a plan beyond that is really what the problem here is.

[commavegarage]

using an accounting definition when it comes to market value for a head coach doesn't make any sense for a variety of reasons for the record.

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

using an accounting definition when it comes to market value for a head coach doesn't make any sense for a variety of reasons for the record.

makes as much sense as "mo.j.'s perceived value"

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

that accounting concept of "market value" is "price that a third party would pay you for your product/service"

based on this concept and the available evidence at hand, i would suggest that jay wright's market value is what the wildcats are paying him. as no one has offered more, there is no evidence to suggest his market value is higher.

while he may percieve that his market value is higher... he has no proof of that value. between you and i, this would NOT be the first instance of someone thinking they are worth more than someone is willing to pay them

If you bought a townhouse in Williamsburg 10 years ago for $1mm, it doesn't mean that the market value is still $1mm. You would derive the market value base on what comparable homes in the area sold for in recent years. Relaying that to the world of coaches, you can get an idea what a coach would be worth on the open market based on amount similar coaches have recently received. While getting accurate numbers on coaches is often very difficult, I believe Memphis pays Josh Pastner 2.65 and Oklahoma State pasy Travis Ford $2.5. Even Ed Cooley's weird hair gets paid $2mm from Providence. I think that there is a strong likelihood Jay Wright that a third party would happily pay Jay Wright more than his current Villanova contract. My guess is that his flirtation with BC means that we will likely have that answer within the next 12 months.

BC posed a number that did not meet jay's perceived value. he did not respond with what his perceived value is - but we know it is more than anyone has offered to pay him.

you could offer your $1m home for sale at $10m 10 years later. that doesn't mean it's worth $10m

[pick6pedro]

To not have a plan beyond that is really what the problem here is.

absolutely.

[tallsy]

I don't necessarily think the ones who pushed for the firing were the ones who also put a cap on what BC could spend on Wright (or any other candidates). I wouldn't at all be surprised if they pushed for more, but were rebuffed by others on the BOT (possibly even Leahy). I think once Wright passed, they were essentially out in the woods without much of a plan. It should be noted that while word is that we came up short financially for Wright, making a play for a big name is never all that easy. They could've been rejected for any number of reasons (i.e. their daughter is still in high school). To not have a plan beyond that is really what the problem here is.

That's all on Bates though. He should have a list ready in case the coach has a scandal, drops dead, etc. Same for football. It's not the BOT or even Leahy's responsibility to be tracking up and coming assistants and mid-major coaches.

Never mind that apparently Bates thought that Donahue deserved another year.

[BC923]

Wait, the Jay Wright stuff was real?

I do enjoy this board.

Was there even one mention outside of twb's mentions about Jay Wright?

BC923 kept saying it but I thought he was just backing my gambit.

Yeah, that's why you saying it jokingly, even when I thought (knew?) it had passed made me all the more disappointed.

[commavegarage]

This is big time on bates.

Regardless of whether or not HE wanted him back, he should've been prepared with a list of candidates that he had already sent out through back channels feelers in the event Donahue was canned.

If he was unprepared for this search (as it seems he was), he clearly does not know how these things work at BC (and tons of other schools for the record).

That would be a very bad sign.