ADVERTISEMENT

Football Rutgers set to hire Kick Ciarrocca as OC

IDK.
2022, BC bottom of ACC in rushing. 2.1 ypc
2021 they were better, but still 9th or 10th in ACC rushing stats

Are you suggesting Aurich should be dumped?
It looks like Kirk will get to choose his staff. Not sure if Aurich will be retained. He left a lot to be desired as the OL coach and was brought in by Gleeson.

Savon has been mentioned as being a young up and coming coach specifically when it comes to recruiting. Also I think those stats are an indication of Savon being McNulty’d.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Knight Shift
IDK.
2022, BC bottom of ACC in rushing. 2.1 ypc
2021 they were better, but still 9th or 10th in ACC rushing stats

Are you suggesting Aurich should be dumped?

2021 - BC OL solid, at least 1 drafted
2022 - BC OL Rutgersesque, best player out for the season

Don't think the RB coach had much impact,
 
Your title says “Kick”, not Kirk.
I know you have not been keeping up, but that is not my title. One of the esteemed moderators changed the title, and I would never dare change a title changed by a moderator. I have done that in the past, only to have the title changed back to the title of moderator's choosing.
Between a rock and a hard place here. 😖
 
People think that way when spending other people’s money.
I’m the last person to say that to and I’ve even mentioned OPM syndrome when it comes to AD spending on coaches. I’m sorry there’s not a huge difference between 1.4 and 1.75…it’s not massive gulf in compensation.
 
I’m the last person to say that to and I’ve even mentioned OPM syndrome when it comes to AD spending on coaches. I’m sorry there’s not a huge difference between 1.4 and 1.75…it’s not massive gulf in compensation.
Does 25% sound like it’s close? Or does 350k sound like chump change?
 
Does 25% sound like it’s close? Or does 350k sound like chump change?
It’s 80% of Riley’s salary and 350K isn’t chump change but that’s not the point. They’re in the same ballpark. It’s not like 1M vs 2M or some big disparity. If you have 80 bucks or 100 bucks is the 20 buck difference some huge gap.
 
It's chump change to fans who drive F150 Lightning Lariats. 😉

I'm sort of with @rutgersguy1 on this. Can we say our OC pay and Clemson's OC pay are in the upper echelon of OC pay? Or in the same neighborhood?
That’s pretty much my point, they’re both in the higher tier of coordinator salaries. It’s not some massive gulf.
 
It’s 80% of Riley’s salary and 350K isn’t chump change but that’s not the point. They’re in the same ballpark. It’s not like 1M vs 2M or some big disparity. If you have 80 bucks or 100 bucks is the 20 buck difference some huge gap.
I want to work for you. 25% increase is really not that far off. Put it this way. You make 750k and I make 1mm. Close or not?
 
I want to work for you. 25% increase is really not that far off. Put it this way. You make 750k and I make 1mm. Close or not?
Going with the assumption that those would both be premium salaries in a company, from the employer's perspective it's similar in that they would want high quality results and performance from both employees with that salary.

I’ll give this as another example of how I view things. Franklin makes 7M/yr, possibly as much as 8M if you include retention bonuses and life insurance. Tucker makes 9.5M/yr

So that gap is anywhere from 1.5M-2.5M. Is it chump change? No. Again that’s not the point. Those are both very premium compensation packages and for both of them you should be expecting similar results like B10 titles, playoff appearances, even possibly national title appearances and championships. Percentages and absolute numbers isn’t what I'm getting at. Even if that gap might be 2M, I don't discern much difference in expectations.

I'd say probably 8-10M is a place where you're expecting conference titles, playoffs and national champ games and titles. That's a 2M gap in absolute terms and 25% extra in salary. That's not the point. If you’re in the ball park of premium salaries, you expect premium results or you’re paying too much which unfortunately is too commonplace in college athletics. A lot of coaches these days make that premium salary and not all of can have all those accomplishments and a lot of schools will overpaying for inadequate results.
 
Going with the assumption that those would both be premium salaries in a company, from the employer's perspective it's similar in that they would want high quality results and performance from both employees with that salary.

I’ll give this as another example of how I view things. Franklin makes 7M/yr, possibly as much as 8M if you include retention bonuses and life insurance. Tucker makes 9.5M/yr

So that gap is anywhere from 1.5M-2.5M. Is it chump change? No. Again that’s not the point. Those are both very premium compensation packages and for both of them you should be expecting similar results like B10 titles, playoff appearances, even possibly national title appearances and championships. Percentages and absolute numbers isn’t what I'm getting at. Even if that gap might be 2M, I don't discern much difference in expectations.

I'd say probably 8-10M is a place where you're expecting conference titles, playoffs and national champ games and titles. That's a 2M gap in absolute terms and 25% extra in salary. That's not the point. If you’re in the ball park of premium salaries, you expect premium results or you’re paying too much which unfortunately is too commonplace in college athletics. A lot of coaches these days make that premium salary and not all of can have all those accomplishments and a lot of schools will overpaying for inadequate results.
I think I get your thinking now. 25% is not far if it’s a big number or small number. To me, 25% is far apart. With in 10% is not far apart. Don’t want to beat a dead horse. One last example. Gleeson was supposed to make 1.025 so it’s not far from KC’s 1.4?
 
I think I get your thinking now. 25% is not far if it’s a big number or small number. To me, 25% is far apart. With in 10% is not far apart. Don’t want to beat a dead horse. One last example. Gleeson was supposed to make 1.025 so it’s not far from KC’s 1.4?
At one time Gleeson at 1M was a premium salary, now maybe still somewhat but not like it was just 3 years ago. Coaching salary inflation is ludicrous.

If you think about it, we’re actually paying about 2.4M in OC salaries this year if Gleeson doesn’t get another job for offsets. Even if he does, we still could be in the vicinity of 2M for OC budget this year.
 
Relative to what we are paying KC, I think Clemson got a bargain. I realize Riley would never come here, but KC's agent deserves a bonus for leveraging GS's challenges in finding a new OC.
 
I’m the last person to say that to and I’ve even mentioned OPM syndrome when it comes to AD spending on coaches. I’m sorry there’s not a huge difference between 1.4 and 1.75…it’s not massive gulf in compensation.
The difference between the two will cover the cost of bringing Wagner in for a game.
 
At one time Gleeson at 1M was a premium salary, now maybe still somewhat but not like it was just 3 years ago. Coaching salary inflation is ludicrous.

If you think about it, we’re actually paying about 2.4M in OC salaries this year if Gleeson doesn’t get another job for offsets. Even if he does, we still could be in the vicinity of 2M for OC budget this year.
Kind of tells you something that Gleeson as of now doesn't have a job, even as a position coach, yet.
 
I wish fans would say that about our fundraising efforts. Should be easy to raise that “little” amount.
 
Does 25% sound like it’s close? Or does 350k sound like chump change?
Keep in mind, we will be paying Gleeson $1 million next year as well, so in fact, RU will be paying $2.4 million next year for our offense..
 
Keep in mind, we will be paying Gleeson $1 million next year as well, so in fact, RU will be paying $2.4 million next year for our offense..
Are you suggesting we should’ve kept Gleeson to save money? Otherwise, I don’t know why you would bring that up.
 
Are you suggesting we should’ve kept Gleeson to save money? Otherwise, I don’t know why you would bring that up.
You keep bringing up the difference between $1.4 mil and $1.7 mil, I was simply setting the record straight as to how much we will actually be paying for our offense next year… $2.4 million
 
You keep bringing up the difference between $1.4 mil and $1.7 mil, I was simply setting the record straight as to how much we will actually be paying for our offense next year… $2.4 million
Yes, I’m arguing that it’s a meaningful difference between 1.75 vs 1.4. The only reason to bring up Gleeson’s pay is if you want to keep him. Otherwise it’s irrelevant. Clemson fired their OC also with more years on the contract.

ETA I looked it up for you. Clemson owes Streeter 1.85mm. So they are paying their OC 3.6mm. Again, not that close to our 2.4mm.
 
Yes, I’m arguing that it’s a meaningful difference between 1.75 vs 1.4. The only reason to bring up Gleeson’s pay is if you want to keep him. Otherwise it’s irrelevant. Clemson fired their OC also with more years on the contract.

ETA I looked it up for you. Clemson owes Streeter 1.85mm. So they are paying their OC 3.6mm. Again, not that close to our 2.4mm.
It’s not irrelevant at all… we are not even close to clemson’s level, and yet we are paying close to what they pay their OC. I brought up Gleeson bc it is incredibly relevant to the underlying issue that we will be paying $2.4 million for offensive coaches chosen by Greg Schiano.. let’s see if it’s worth it
 
It’s not irrelevant at all… we are not even close to clemson’s level, and yet we are paying close to what they pay their OC. I brought up Gleeson bc it is incredibly relevant to the underlying issue that we will be paying $2.4 million for offensive coaches chosen by Greg Schiano.. let’s see if it’s worth it
Again, we are not paying “close to” to Clemson. I added to my post earlier. If you do the apples to apples and add what Clemson owes their previous OC, it’s 3.6mm to our 2.4mm. Only a 50% difference.
 
Again, we are not paying “close to” to Clemson. I added to my post earlier. If you do the apples to apples and add what Clemson owes their previous OC, it’s 3.6mm to our 2.4mm. Only a 50% difference.
Bro, if you are going to make that kind of argument it’s clear you are so dense to the situation you can’t look at it objectively. There’s a reason you are using Clemson and not Ohio State or Penn State. Reality is we will be paying more for our offensive staff than those programs.

What are you even arguing anymore?
 
Bro, if you are going to make that kind of argument it’s clear you are so dense to the situation you can’t look at it objectively. There’s a reason you are using Clemson and not Ohio State or Penn State. Reality is we will be paying more for our offensive staff than those programs.

What are you even arguing anymore?
Bruh, I like that you said objectively and then say that RU is spending more money on coaching staff than PSU and OSU.
 
Took a look last night at his 4 years at Minnesota. I wanted to see how they did against B10 competition in those 4 years. I just looked at B10 records of the teams they beat and lost to each year to try to eliminate noise of OOC plus the B10 is the biggest part of anyone's schedule. Still some noise because everyone doesn't play each other.

2022

Wins
Wisc (4-5), NW (1-8), Neb (3-6), RU (1-8), MSU (3-6) ....B10 record of teams they beat (12-30)

Losses
Iowa (5-4), PSU (7-2), ILL (5-4), Purdue (6-3).... B10 record of teams they lost to (23-13)

2019

Wins
NW (1-8), PSU (7-2), Mary (1-8), RU (0-9), Neb (3-6), ILL (4-5), Purdue (3-6) ...B10 record of teams they beat (19-44)

Losses
Wisc (7-2), Iowa (6-3)...B10 record of teams they lost to (13-5)

2018
Wins
Wisc (5-4), Purdue (5-4), IU (2-7)...B10 record of teams they beat (12-15)

Losses
NW (8-1), ILL (2-7), Neb (3-6), OSU (8-1), Iowa (5-4), Mary (3-6).B10 record of teams they lost to (29-25)

2017
Wins
Neb (3-6), ILL (0-9)...B10 record of teams they beat (3-15)

Losses
Wisc (9-0), NW (7-2), Mich (5-4), Iowa (4-5), MSU (7-2), Purdue (4-5), Mary (2-7)..B10 record of teams they lost to (38-25)

Looks like he'll fit right in.
 
ADVERTISEMENT