None of the 250 words and 1484 characters used in that reply make any sense. Specifically the last paragraph. So you think the fact that we are paying someone 40% above fair market value is a sign of advancement in the program? Ciarrocca was not 1st 2nd 3rd or 4th choice. If he was a primary target he would have been here 40 days earlier. Paying up is not a sign of success in a program. It actually may be a sign of the opposite.
It actually makes more sense to pay more for coaches and recruiting contacts in a rebuild than in an established program for all the reasons you state above. Outside of Fran brown no one on that first staff O or D warranted their paycheck. Fran brown is not being paid because he is a great teacher of the game. He is being paid because he is a lights out recruiter. As others have said many programs do a helluva lot more with less. Schiano chose to blow up his assistants budget in the wrong way. Gleeson,aurich, Nunz,Augie, underwood were not paid poorly. They were all paid above value actually. The issue is there was no one with real experience and it showed.
Ciarocca would have been here 40 days earlier if they offered him 1.4 M 40 days earlier. Paying up for a coach, who has demonstrated success in the Big Ten, and who can fix our issues on offense is priceless. That’s the only thing that matters. Paying Gleeson $1M was a waste because he wasn’t up to the task.
The prior assistants were compensated handsomely, and while they are no longer with us, their efforts brought us to where we are today as a program, and that’s something no one can ever take away from them. The defense has a plethora of talent and depth. Offense needs more talent, but showed promise. Nevertheless, we are light years ahead of where we were three years ago, though there is still a long way to go. It’s is gratifying to see that things are coming together and that we are on the right track.