Is UL Athletics Broke?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunVic

NO, WE HIRED THE BEST COACH WE COULD FIND AT THAT NUMBER.

HOW HARD IS THAT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND?

---

There's a difference between paying the going rate for a new coach and settling for what you can get with what you have.

If UL had said "starting salary at $1.25 million" we are recalibrating what we are willing to pay for being the "stepping stone" for coaches looking for upward mobility.

Would we have had "better" candidates if we DID offer that? Maybe, maybe not.

Would Mike have gotten the job at the salary? May, maybe not.

Saints did the same thing with Dennis Allen. Continuity.

I just hope it works in both instances.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cajun Monkee

There's a difference between paying the going rate for a new coach and settling for what you can get with what you have.

If UL had said "starting salary at $1.25 million" we are recalibrating what we are willing to pay for being the "stepping stone" for coaches looking for upward mobility.

Would we have had "better" candidates if we DID offer that? Maybe, maybe not.

Would Mike have gotten the job at the salary? May, maybe not.

Saints did the same thing with Dennis Allen. Continuity.

I just hope it works in both instances.

---

I don't think we did that. I believe the budget set was $750,000 and the target was CMD because with him, you get a lot more intangibles that you would not get with any other candidate at that salary.

It's kind of a chicken and egg thing at this point. I believe they had a budget and that they believed that the best candidate they could find with that budget was right here and they suceedded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turbine

Don't you think that should have been the lead quote in your first post?

A year ago June, Maggard was given a new title and Pay raise from the ether, as Vice President of Intercollegiate Athletics.

His contract will run through June 30, 2026.

$400,000 per year with a 2.5% increase each year.

Louisiana's expenses were a lot higher a year ago June, than they are now. Income is probably about the same, with a bump to $2 mil from the Sunbelt.

Athletic departments are never broke, it just depends on how much academics wants to invest in their advertising arm.

Do companies ever ask if their marking department is broke? No, they spend what they have.

---

"Athletic departments are never broke, it just depends on how much academics wants to invest in their advertising arm."

That is the key question! Athletics is an investment for the university and is its window to the world. However, academics doesn't always seem to view it that way. Now that we have achieved Tier 1 academic status and are well on our way to a half billion dollar endowment, it is time to take athletics to a Tier 1 status as well. Our main campus has been rebuilt and worthy of its academic standing. How did we fund the total campus transformation? Can we similarly fund the athletic campus transformation? We didn't first grow our endowment then rebuild. Why fund athletics infrastructure differently? This is an important investment by the university that can visibly change the perception of UL by its alumni and public. People who become successful want to support success. Let's give them something to support instead of asking for support in hopes that one day we will achieve success.

It was reported that UCLA is operating with a $100M deficit in athletics. Fortunately for UCLA, it looks like the BIG 10 will bail them out of that financial crisis. OK State was in a financial crisis until Boone Pickens stepped in. I read some time ago that Houston operated in the past with a $40M deficit, but the President decided that athletics was a key to national recognition for UH and continued to fund it. Then, along came Tillman Fertitta and look at where UH is today. We don't have a Pickens or Fertitta as yet. We don't seem to have a handle on who our successful alumni are across the US. What would motivate such an alumnus to do what Pickens or Fertitta did? We can't wait for that miracle that may never happen.

So, create our own miracle and make a major commitment to similarly completing that athletic campus transformation. Have a major announcement outlining its steps towards achieving that to include completing the building of the athletic infrastructure like we did on campus and not let this drag on year after year. Use that as a national springboard to building an athletics endowment. Business as usual is not moving the needle. If we want to motivate people to financially support success in athletics, first show to our alumni and to the public the university's commitment to success.

Y’all see what is happening here, right? This thing about money was brought up in multiple threads and didn’t get the desired traction, so now it has blossomed into its own thread. How glorious.

The agenda here isn’t exactly a secret. There only a certain few goals with this discussion:

- Erode confidence in CMD (by insinuating that he’s all we could afford)
- Erode confidence in Maggard (by insinuating that he mismanaged various things related to the budget)
- The notion that we aren’t prepared to pay the money to be big time like we think we are (kinda sounds like “know your place, little brother”, huh?)

I suggest we all just let this discussion die.

For goodness sakes, it’s homecoming week. No need to rattle this pointless saber.

We are all frustrated. But we all want to move in a positive direction. Not this crap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunVic

I don't think we did that. I believe the budget set was $750,000 and the target was CMD because with him, you get a lot more intangibles that you would not get with any other candidate at that salary.

It's kind of a chicken and egg thing at this point. I believe they had a budget and that they believed that the best candidate they could find with that budget was right here and they suceedded.

---

By all accounts, we interviewed other candidates from bigger schools but decided on Desormeaux. We paid him that because that pay is in line for his resume, not because its all we had. Had we hired Lanning, it wouldn't have been for $750k.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zephyr

By all accounts, we interviewed other candidates from bigger schools but decided on Desormeaux. We paid him that because that pay is in line for his resume, not because its all we had. Had we hired Lanning, it wouldn't have been for $750k.

---

If I post a job and someone applies with an ask way below what I am expecting, I am as skeptical of that person as the one who wants double the market. I will still hire them if qualified. I will also often pay at the level I think they are at regardless of ask because down the road, it's worth it. Going 100k below Napier's starting salary is concerning to me. Whether it's budget constraints or what CMD's resume says he should be making doesn't matter. I feel like our program has progressed to where that floor moves higher, not lower...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BabbForHeisman

Y’all see what is happening here, right? This thing about money was brought up in multiple threads and didn’t get the desired traction, so now it has blossomed into its own thread. How glorious.

The agenda here isn’t exactly a secret. There only a certain few goals with this discussion:

- Erode confidence in CMD (by insinuating that he’s all we could afford)
- Erode confidence in Maggard (by insinuating that he mismanaged various things related to the budget)
- The notion that we aren’t prepared to pay the money to be big time like we think we are (kinda sounds like “know your place, little brother”, huh?)

I suggest we all just let this discussion die.

For goodness sakes, it’s homecoming week. No need to rattle this pointless saber.

We are all frustrated. But we all want to move in a positive direction. Not this crap.

---

Your analysis, as usual, can't be further from the truth.

You do not get to set agenda's which are not yours, neither do they exist because you have said so.

This thread, with mounds of accurate and supplemental information is killing you, isn't?

Participate or sit on the side, but please don't try to taint with you regular BS.

Thanks

Vic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zephyr

By all accounts, we interviewed other candidates from bigger schools but decided on Desormeaux. We paid him that because that pay is in line for his resume, not because its all we had. Had we hired Lanning, it wouldn't have been for $750k.

---

Source?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JayWalker

Because it isn't accurate. Dr. Maggard was not told he couldn't spend more than $750,000. He hired Mike because he thought Mike was the right choice and paid him a competitive salary with other first year coaches in our league.

I think you are totally off base with your hypothesis.

And, don't yell at me.

---

Forget Mike's Salary. 750,000 dollars is enough to buy a hell of a coach. My question is about the tools to operate & run a successful comprehensive program? Is Mike being given budget in line with the budget Billy had to operate? And if not, why not?

It's not about the money. Any other new HC was going to get close to what CMD got.

The story that is unfolding here has nothing to do with money. Biggest reason for giving CMD the job was to continue the cULture. It's what happened after this that is important.

CBN ruthlessly raided our program after CMD was hired. This is the biggest reason for our 2-2 start and the cULture seemingly absent. Any argument otherwise or focusing on salaries is pointless naval gazing. Some here point to changes in routines by CMD. That may have some validity as well to the cULture hit.

We can't bring those players and coaches back, but we can change what we're doing NOW to bring back the cULture, and it has nothing to do with how much CMD is being paid.