Politi: "Greg Schiano deserves a contract extension as Rutgers clears a major hurdle"

[rutgersguy1]

You know another coach like Doeren who has been around at his school awhile is Matt Campbell. His name has been hot at times in his career. He's done a good job this year getting them bowl eligible after losing a bunch of players, including his starting qb and rb among others, to the gambling stuff.

He's won 7-9 games most years and better than .500 in conference most of those years too. He also would have made a 12 team playoff in the pandemic year like Tom Allen at IU.

He gets paid 4M a year but I just found out his contract actually has those kind of bonus clauses tied to wins. He gets 250K per win starting at 7. I think his buyout if he were to leave is 4M. The school is getting reasonable terms and he's got a reasonable term if he wants to walk. It's seem pretty fair to both sides.

That's a reasonable contract. Frankly, I'd be okay giving even a slightly higher number for each win starting at 7. Give a 500K bonus for a conference record over .500. I'm fine with paying for performance, not paying and being locked in for unknown performance.

Why are distruptions to the norm for coaching contracts always in the favor of the coach. Contracts generally used to be 4-5 years. Now it's not unusual to see 7-10 years. Lump sum payouts are also becoming more common. Having no offsets for future employment are even popping up.

Why can't we have more distruptors from the school/AD side? You can if some are more willing to realize the leverage they have and the actual landscape. Pay tied to performance is a fair deal for both sides. A reasonable base salary which is still in the millions of dollar range and large bonuses tied to wins above a certain threshold like 7 or nice bonus for conference record over .500 or nice bonus for conference title etc... These aren't one sided asks/demands and is fair to both sides.

 

[rutgersguy1]

Actual Xs and Os yes. Good coaches abound. But you also need to pay for credibility and buzz for fans and recruits. Hobbs hired Schiano because that’s what the fan base wanted. That created added spark for fans.

Say what you will about Deion and the losing streak, but he put Colorado on the map immediately and they are miles ahead of where they were last year.

Charlie Weis and Les Miles had spark and buzz but they left terrible messes in their wake.

Lance Leipold is totally understated and pedestrian on that front but has won at lower levels and now has Kansas doing things they haven't in a decade plus and took over a situation as bad as you'd find in the P5. He wasn't an expensive coach to get either.

 

[Shelby65]

Charlie Weis and Les Miles had spark and buzz but they left terrible messes in their wake.

Lance Leipold is totally understated and pedestrian on that front but has won at lower levels and now has Kansas doing things they haven't in a decade plus and took over a situation as bad as you'd find in the P5. He wasn't an expensive coach to get either.

Obviously the buzz hires don’t always work out but it’s always going to be part of the equation.

I could discuss the Leipold comparison but am keeping Shelby’s Promise until the end of the season.

 

[rutgersguy1]

Obviously the buzz hires don’t always work out but it’s always going to be part of the equation.

I could discuss the Leipold comparison but am keeping Shelby’s Promise until the end of the season.

I agree buzz hires can work or not. Any kind of hire can work or not. I don't discriminate where a coach comes from because I see success and failure from different types of backgrounds.

It is a business so that can be part of it for sure.

 

[Shelby65]

I agree buzz hires can work or not. Any kind of hire can work or not. I don't discriminate where a coach comes from because I see success and failure from different types of backgrounds.

It is a business so that can be part of it for sure.

I’m sure you agree that AD’s who make unpopular, against-the-wind hires won’t last long in their jobs by contradicting donor and fan interests.

 

[MADHAT1]

that's the mistake, you and others think you need money to attract a good coach. There are plenty of good coaches who'd love to coach in the BIG

Greg is overpaid for results, zero question on that

We could get 6 wins with someone from sunbelt with this schedule this year and next

well why did Ash win only 8 during his 3 & i/3 years.
As for sun belt schedule, glad to see OSU and the B1G opponents played this season are just sun belt material.
Schiano is getting the yearly salary he deserves, length of contract is fair when you think if the type of program he took over, but since Rutgers is going bowling for the second time in four years during his return engagement , maybe sweeten up the bonuses he gets for reaching certain goals to pay for performance.
Yiu might not like Greg, but you got to like the way he's made RU a bowl team twice in his four years back in charge.

As for plenty of coaches wanting to be HCs in the B1G, there are plenty that do, but they expect to be paid like most B1G HCs are and would demand the type of support to be successful or wouldn't risk their career for a program that doesn't look like it's willing to spend what it takes to be a winner.
There is a reason Hobbs hired Greg when it looked like he didn't want to. Hobbs wasn't offering what it would take for a quality candidate to accept the job and the RU fan base forced him to give Schiano part of what Greg demanded he wanted to take the job
Most others wouldn't get that fan base support and the ones that would get the fans behind their hire would expect a salary much hire than Hobbs would be allowed to pay.

Remember it's easy to say RU could have done better , I say that too, but for what RU was willing to offer, Schiano was the best Hobbs could do.

 

[rutgersguy1]

I’m sure you agree that AD’s who make unpopular, against-the-wind hires won’t last long in their jobs by contradicting donor and fan interests.

I’d mostly agree with that but won’t say they won’t last long. They just better make sure they’re right if they do or they’ll be out quickly. Most ADs consult and “bring along” the big boosters though. I don’t think it’s done in a silo.

 

[rurahrah000]

Now the we are 6-6, if we lose our bowl game, how many here would give Schiano an extension?

 

[RUTGERS95]

Now the we are 6-6, if we lose our bowl game, how many here would give Schiano an extension?

you don't get it, 81 teams make a bowl, many here consider that a HUGE success

 

[RU#1fan]

Hobbs said in his Podcast this week that Greg is here as long as he wants. Some AD leadership.
If we are still a meddling 6-6 or 5-7 program ( or even worse g-d forbid) we should be looking for a new AD.

 

[RutgersChow]

Hobbs said in his Podcast this week that Greg is here as long as he wants. Some AD leadership.
If we are still a meddling 6-6 or 5-7 program ( or even worse g-d forbid) we should be looking for a new AD.

Pretty amazing statement considering Hobbs didn't want him to begin with. With Oregon, Washington and USC coming into the conference and GS remaining as our coach don't ever expect to be a top eight team in the league.

 

[Purple-Ed]

Now the we are 6-6, if we lose our bowl game, how many here would give Schiano an extension?

rutgersal?

 

[vkj91]

Anybody who doesn’t realize that our ceiling 99 times out of a hundred is 6/7 wins doesn’t watch football.

 

[brgRC90]

Anybody who doesn’t realize that our ceiling 99 times out of a hundred is 6/7 wins doesn’t watch football.

With Schianoball the ceiling is 6/7.

 

[King of S]

you don't get it, 81 teams make a bowl, many here consider that a HUGE success

Bingo - a low bid bowl means squat these days.

 

[vkj91]

With Schianoball the ceiling is 6/7.

Nobody here thinks I’m some schiano apologist but 6/7 is the ceiling regardless. You have 3 guaranteed losses every year. Schedule usually gives us a virtually un winnable crossover game too. That leave 8 games to win 6
NJ doesn’t love college football, as a result, we can’t cheat. We can’t do what we need to do to compete with the Michigan’s and Ohio states of the world. We should strive to be iowa. Who once divisions go away is a 6/7 win team

 

[NotInRHouse]

With Schianoball the ceiling is 6/7.

As opposed to all the B1G teams that got more than 7 wins this year.

All 4 of them.

We def have the resources of those 4.

I knew the weed on the west coast was strong, but damn!

 

[NotInRHouse]

Nobody here thinks I’m some schiano apologist but 6/7 is the ceiling regardless. You have 3 guaranteed losses every year. Schedule usually gives us a virtually un winnable crossover game too. That leave 8 games to win 6
NJ doesn’t love college football, as a result, we can’t cheat. We can’t do what we need to do to compete with the Michigan’s and Ohio states of the world. We should strive to be iowa. Who once divisions go away is a 6/7 win team

To be fair the schedule is changing next year, but the reality is, 4 B1G teams had more than 7 wins this year.

Somehow, 4 years removed from Ash we should be regularly beating those programs, even though we competed with them.

With the schedule change it is OK to think we can do 8-9 and 10 here and there but is never going to placate the trolls.

 

[rufeelinit]

I don’t see an extension as being prudent this off season but I expect Hobbs to give him one based on his comments on that podcast. Especially if we win the bowl game against another 6-6 juggernaut.

We still have a four year financial commitment and I am not sure there is a strong basis to expect additional progress next year. Especially with the total investment in GW.

I would assess GS 2.0 for one more year before lengthening our commitment to him.

 

[RW90]

Somehow, 4 years removed from Ash we should be regularly beating those programs, even though we competed with them.

The final scores of our losses would seem to indicate otherwise.

 

[vkj91]

To be fair the schedule is changing next year, but the reality is, 4 B1G teams had more than 7 wins this year.

Somehow, 4 years removed from Ash we should be regularly beating those programs, even though we competed with them.

With the schedule change it is OK to think we can do 8-9 and 10 here and there but is never going to placate the trolls.

Disagree. Schedule change is no help. We are here for TV money. We will always get 3 virtually impossible games. Just look who we get next year. It’s not like we dropped OSU and picked up Illinois

 

[brgRC90]

As opposed to all the B1G teams that got more than 7 wins this year.

All 4 of them.

We def have the resources of those 4.

I knew the weed on the west coast was strong, but damn!

So now you're arguing it's not even possible to win more than 6 or 7 games. Not a great defense of the coach.

 

[brgRC90]

Nobody here thinks I’m some schiano apologist but 6/7 is the ceiling regardless. You have 3 guaranteed losses every year. Schedule usually gives us a virtually un winnable crossover game too. That leave 8 games to win 6
NJ doesn’t love college football, as a result, we can’t cheat. We can’t do what we need to do to compete with the Michigan’s and Ohio states of the world. We should strive to be iowa. Who once divisions go away is a 6/7 win team

I know this,argument in defense of Schiano well. It doesn't fly. How did a team like West Virginia play above their heads for so long? Boise State? Cincinnati? Because they have such deep pockets? Is West Virginia chock full of great players? Idaho?

 

[KK1827]

Translation from the idiots here:

“Schiano should be fired because in November he lost to three 10+ win teams and then ran into a bad matchup with maryland”.

 

[Caliknight]

Hobbs said in his Podcast this week that Greg is here as long as he wants. Some AD leadership.
If we are still a meddling 6-6 or 5-7 program ( or even worse g-d forbid) we should be looking for a new AD.

He’s not going to say anything else on a podcast when we are bowling. We stacks a few losing seasons and he’s not here as long as he wants.

The beauty of the 8 year contract is you don’t need to extend him like you would if it was shorter.

 

[KK1827]

He’s not going to say anything else on a podcast when we are bowling. We stacks a few losing seasons and he’s not here as long as he wants.

The beauty of the 8 year contract is you don’t need to extend him like you would if it was shorter.

How many college coaches have less than 4 years term on their contracts?

 

[Caliknight]

None who win a lot. Only those that don’t. Guy who just smacked us around has 4.

 

[KK1827]

None who win a lot. Only those that don’t. Guy who just smacked us around has 4.

Fyi, locks just signed a new contract in august and now makes $6.1mm/yr. He will be signing an additional 1 year post signing day as is standard.

I’ll ask again though. You know any college coaches with less than 4 years on their contract?

 

[RUTGERS95]

None who win a lot. Only those that don’t. Guy who just smacked us around has 4.

used to be no less than 2 and now it's 4 lol

Mel just keeps ticking away

 

[Caliknight]

Chip Kelly first guy I googled ia singed through 27.

I’m sure there are others.

 

[rutgersguy1]

Fyi, locks just signed a new contract in august and now makes $6.1mm/yr. He will be signing an additional 1 year post signing day as is standard.

I’ll ask again though. You know any college coaches with less than 4 years on their contract?

Chip Kelly did for sure on his first contract that went down to the last year or two and I’m not even sure if he has more than 4 currently.

Babers probably went under 4 years too going into this year.

Tom Allen’s deal will have less than 4 years left after this year and I doubt he’s getting anything tacked on

Arnett’s contract at Miss St was for 4 years iirc but it cost them 4M to fire him this year

I wouldn’t really care what the standard is because the AD standard has proven to be financially foolish and irresponsible

With portal and what not rosters can change anyway regardless of having 4 years left or not. I remember reading about contract in the FCS at one of the Montana schools years ago. They didn’t fire the coach explicitly but just let the contract run its course and didn’t renew it. Do they not need to recruit at those levels? It’s more likely they can’t afford to be so financially irresponsible as ADs in the P5.

 

[rutgersguy1]

Chip Kelly first guy I googled ia singed through 27.

I’m sure there are others.

I’ve mentioned him in this thread or one of these threads in the past and there are a few others off the top of my head I’ve mentioned again in a post below yours

 

[KK1827]

Chip Kelly first guy I googled ia singed through 27.

I’m sure there are others.

Ill ask again, how many coaches are signed for less than 4 years? (Fyi, there are 3 numbers less than 4. They are 3, 2, and 1).

 

[brgRC90]

Ill ask again, how many coaches are signed for less than 4 years? (Fyi, there are 3 numbers less than 4. They are 3, 2, and 1).

Are all those coaches with long contracts doing a better job than when 3 years was standard?

 

[rutgersguy1]

I’ll give another example of where I’d hold the line…Jedd Fisch at Arizona has had a great year in year 3. 9 win season, 3rd place in the PAC and ranked in the mid teens in the CFP.

I’m sure he’ll get a new deal but who knows what next year will bring. Give a big bonus for this year but don’t commit long term and with lots of guaranteed money.

I mean what’s the point anyway and what do you actually gain as the school. Jonathan Smith is about to leave Oregon St and Mark Stoops UK…both are good coaches. They got nice deals from their schools but they’re still leaving. If they had tanked as coaches the schools would’ve been on the hook for long deals but if they’re good they still can leave. So you’ve taken on all the risk of the downside but didn’t get much of the upside.

 

[KK1827]

Are all those coaches with long contracts doing a better job than when 3 years was standard?

This is basically the same thing as saying “those damn college kids shouldnt get paid to play and i hope no one gives them money”. While knowing that every other school is paying players and then acting confused as to why your team isnt getting as much talent in the door.

1) I agree its insane college kids are getting paid to play
2) I agree its insane that all coaches need 4+ years on their deals.

However I also have competency to realize this is the era we are in and you adapt or die.

 

[KK1827]

I’ll give another example of where I’d hold the line…Jedd Fisch at Arizona has had a great year in year 3. 9 win season, 3rd place in the PAC and ranked in the mid teens in the CFP.

I’m sure he’ll get a new deal but who knows what next year will bring. Give a big bonus for this year but don’t commit long term and with lots of guaranteed money.

I mean what’s the point anyway and what do you actually gain as the school. Jonathan Smith is about to leave Oregon St and Mark Stoops UK…both are good coaches. They got nice deals from their schools but they’re still leaving. If they had tanked as coaches the schools would’ve been on the hook for long deals but if they’re good they still can leave. So you’ve taken on all the risk of the downside but didn’t get much of the upside.

This is just ignoring the reality of the sport. If you dont have 4+ years on your deal and commit long term to a coach, dont expect good recruits to commit long term to a school

 

[Knight Shift]

I’ll give another example of where I’d hold the line…Jedd Fisch at Arizona has had a great year in year 3. 9 win season, 3rd place in the PAC and ranked in the mid teens in the CFP.

I’m sure he’ll get a new deal but who knows what next year will bring. Give a big bonus for this year but don’t commit long term and with lots of guaranteed money.

I mean what’s the point anyway and what do you actually gain as the school. Jonathan Smith is about to leave Oregon St and Mark Stoops UK…both are good coaches. They got nice deals from their schools but they’re still leaving. If they had tanked as coaches the schools would’ve been on the hook for long deals but if they’re good they still can leave. So you’ve taken on all the risk of the downside but didn’t get much of the upside.

On the who knows what next year will bring theme. And let's head off the BS but but buts at the pass.

Lincoln Reilly had a returning Heisman Trophy QB return this year. Lincoln makes $11M per year.

The vaunted Mack Brown had a 4,300 yard passer in Drake Maybe return to UNC this year.

 

[brgRC90]

This is basically the same thing as saying “those damn college kids shouldnt get paid to play and i hope no one gives them money”. While knowing that every other school is paying players and then acting confused as to why your team isnt getting as much talent in the door.

1) I agree its insane college kids are getting paid to play
2) I agree its insane that all coaches need 4+ years on their deals.

However I also have competency to realize this is the era we are in and you adapt or die.

So basically you're saying "we have to give bad coaches longer contracts so we can (hopefully) attract better coaches in the future," which will then be pushed out even longer due to long contracts.

 

[rutgersguy1]

This is just ignoring the reality of the sport. If you dont have 4+ years on your deal and commit long term to a coach, dont expect good recruits to commit long term to a school

Did Chip Kelly not get decent recruits when UCLA let his contract run until he got his 8 win season. Even now he doesn’t have more than 4 year and can he not recruit decent players.

Players leave anyway with portal and you can also get some players other the portal so it’s not like before. That’s reality of the landscape regardless of whether a coach has 4 years or not. To me that’s just agents hoodwinking ADs like they always do. It’s as crazy as the 8-10 year deals thar are becoming increasingly common lately. Who the heck can predict anything over that amount of time.