Jen's desk cheat sheet coaches list

Edwin_Bambino said:

I’m happy to bash Jen as much as the next person, but this is dumb. They tried with Campbell, offered him a ridiculous amount of money for a coach who is essentially a 7 win Sark with a Tinpot Fiesta Bowl (albeit with Iowa State). Aranda was never coming here, Lincoln went to arguably the best CFB job in the country. There weren’t a lot of great options and there were a lot of comparable programs looking. This is bitching for bitching’s sake.

godawgst said:

Edwin_Bambino said:

I’m happy to bash Jen as much as the next person, but this is dumb. They tried with Campbell, offered him a ridiculous amount of money for a coach who is essentially a 7 win Sark with a Tinpot Fiesta Bowl (albeit with Iowa State). Aranda was never coming here, Lincoln went to arguably the best CFB job in the country. There weren’t a lot of great options and there were a lot of comparable programs looking. This is bitching for bitching’s sake.

The best CFB job in the country doesn't have 2 coaches in the last 50 years worth a fuck.

If you strike out with Campbell, option B isn't 2 just settle. her 2nd-5th choices are garbage. You know how the movie ends with any of them b4 the contract is even written up.

Boosters found a way to pool 38 million dollars for 5 years. Not my money but I will assume the 5-10 guys in the room could have came up with another eight and got to 9 per year. Hell Dan Mullins flies himself here 1st class to sign that deal.

If you can't get more than the 7.5 than go find a top shelf OC/DC from a blue blood top 10 school and give them a crack.

In a typical season Kaleb's defense will shit the bed two games a year and our offense will fire enough blanks over a quarter or two for the other 2 losses.

1to392831weretaken said:

RaceBannon said:

7 million isn't big money

The fact that Jen didn't know that speaks volumes


I'd say both Deboner and Campbell are not first page but they were for Jen

It will play out regardless of whether I let it or not

Jen is a symptom. Its pretty clear that the USC boosters pulled a coup and told President Folt either her signature or her brains would be on the contract

UW doesn't get it and never will

Still pumping the we do it the right way bullshit that had the Pac 9 all to happy to drop the hammer

We'll see if the new guy fucks up the staff and enjoy more excuses why we can't

So say a name. What is the name of the coach who's so guaranteed to win at UW that he's worth more than $40 million on the books (with over $10 million due to the last shitty staff as well)? "Make Saban say no" is funny and all, but what's the real name of a coach who's as good?

Let's look at the "big dick hire" that USC just made: Rumor is compensation to Riley totals $110 million over 10 years, $1 million in overpaying for his Norman houses, $6 million paid house in LA, paying his $4.5 million buyout from Oklahoma. So that's $121.5 million they're on the hook for, plus Clay Helton's $10 million. USC just bet half the cost of Husky Stadium remodel on a guy who's won as many playoff games as Chris Petersen in spite of having far more attempts, having taken over a ready-made juggernaut in a weak conference that he can't even win anymore with said juggernaut.

So bold, expensive, "we care about football at USC" move? Absolutely! A move I'd want UW making? Fuuuuuuck no. We're looking at a coaching bubble that's every bit as stupid as the housing bubble, dot-com bubble, etc., and right as interest is waning and attendance is dropping all across the country (even SEC schools are no longer filling up for no-name games like they used to). Some of these ridiculous guaranteed money contracts that these schools are writing are going to leave them locked into flashy coaches that suck or face program bankruptcy.

It's about value. There is a list of coaches you can count on one hand who you feel confident has what it takes to win a playoff game. Anybody not on that list is a gamble. I'd rather pay $4 million per year for the guy with 12:1 odds than $11 million per year for the guy with 8:1 odds. The odds are terrible either way, and at least in the case of the cheaper guy, you can fire him if he sucks and have another crack at it. With that ridiculous contract, USC is stuck with Riley for better or worse. MSU is stuck with Mel Tucker. LSU will be stuck with both Brian Kellys.

Houhusky said:

Large universities have been playing with monopoly money for decades.

value bets are meaningless when you are betting pocket change, you just want to pick the winner, if it costs a few extra dollars who gives a fuck.

You pay what it takes to get YOUR GUY, hedging into the 3rd or 4th choice to save a few pennies in 2-4 years is fucking dumb.

GreenRiverGatorz said:

Houhusky said:

1to392831weretaken said:

Houhusky said:

Large universities have been playing with monopoly money for decades.

value bets are meaningless when you are betting pocket change, you just want to pick the winner, if it costs a few extra dollars who gives a fuck.

You pay what it takes to get YOUR GUY, hedging into the 3rd or 4th choice to save a few pennies in 2-4 years is fucking dumb.

I see you didn't read my guysm stuff. I think the monopoly money metaphor isn't a metaphor. It's a bubble that's going to pop. You can only keep kicking the can down the road for so long. How many multi-million dollar coaching contracts can be on your books at same time? Two? Three? There are two components to the hire, and one is being able to fire the fucker if he ends up sucking. These insane contracts are going to bite schools in the ass when this all comes crashing down and they can't afford to fire their loser coach because they're not bringing in enough gate and the TV money shrank instead of continuing to balloon.

Furthermore, your logic only makes sense when there's some amount of certainty that "picking the winner" is possible. In a system as chaotic and random as picking a winning coach, in which the difference between your first and second choice is $30 million but the difference between either guy's odds of winning are so nebulous that even a group of message board retards can't come to a consensus, value bets are plenty meaningful.

When playing my odds for program success, I'm going to take three whacks at DeBoner over one whack at Lincoln Riley, and that's about how the math works out.

Small time pussy hedge type thinking.

"Three whacks at DeBoner" over the next decade is much more expensive to the program over "one whack at Lincoln Riley" for 2-3 years.

If you can't find someone you think is the best for the job and are instead trying to "value" hire just put Sven in charge for 10K and call it a day.

Its all random anyways, might as well hire NAIA coaches for the next hundred years for cheap because it will save money!

Sure, and if that was the predetermined outcome we wouldn't be having this conversation. If you disagree with the probabilities that @1to392831weretaken is throwing out there, then fucking say so and engage with that. But at this point you're just a @backthepack minion regurgitating the same "big dick" nonsense.

And tough fucking shit, because it's all moot. We don't have a fully guaranteed $100m to throw at a coach. We do in fact have much smaller dicks than USC and LSU, and if that's a surprise to you then you're a fucking idiot. The amount of dipshits here who appear to be shocked at the revelation that we stopped caring about football in the 90s is astounding. This isn't news. Look around. This is what we have and it's only going to get worse as the CFB parity gulf continues to widen. So either start a multi-billion dollar empire and give UW a slush fund to stay ahead in this sport, or just shut the fuck up already.

RaceBannon said:

GreenRiverGatorz said:

Houhusky said:

GreenRiverGatorz said:

Houhusky said:

1to392831weretaken said:

Houhusky said:

Large universities have been playing with monopoly money for decades.

value bets are meaningless when you are betting pocket change, you just want to pick the winner, if it costs a few extra dollars who gives a fuck.

You pay what it takes to get YOUR GUY, hedging into the 3rd or 4th choice to save a few pennies in 2-4 years is fucking dumb.

I see you didn't read my guysm stuff. I think the monopoly money metaphor isn't a metaphor. It's a bubble that's going to pop. You can only keep kicking the can down the road for so long. How many multi-million dollar coaching contracts can be on your books at same time? Two? Three? There are two components to the hire, and one is being able to fire the fucker if he ends up sucking. These insane contracts are going to bite schools in the ass when this all comes crashing down and they can't afford to fire their loser coach because they're not bringing in enough gate and the TV money shrank instead of continuing to balloon.

Furthermore, your logic only makes sense when there's some amount of certainty that "picking the winner" is possible. In a system as chaotic and random as picking a winning coach, in which the difference between your first and second choice is $30 million but the difference between either guy's odds of winning are so nebulous that even a group of message board retards can't come to a consensus, value bets are plenty meaningful.

When playing my odds for program success, I'm going to take three whacks at DeBoner over one whack at Lincoln Riley, and that's about how the math works out.

Small time pussy hedge type thinking.

"Three whacks at DeBoner" over the next decade is much more expensive to the program over "one whack at Lincoln Riley" for 2-3 years.

If you can't find someone you think is the best for the job and are instead trying to "value" hire just put Sven in charge for 10K and call it a day.

Its all random anyways, might as well hire NAIA coaches for the next hundred years for cheap because it will save money!

Sure, and if that was the predetermined outcome we wouldn't be having this conversation. If you disagree with the probabilities that @1to392831weretaken is throwing out there, then fucking say so and engage with that. But at this point you're just a @backthepack minion regurgitating the same "big dick" nonsense.

And tough fucking shit, because it's all moot. We don't have a fully guaranteed $100m to throw at a coach. We do in fact have much smaller dicks than USC and LSU, and if that's a surprise to you then you're a fucking idiot. The amount of dipshits here who appear to be shocked at the revelation that we stopped caring about football in the 90s is astounding. This isn't news. Look around. This is what we have and it's only going to get worse as the CFB parity gulf continues to widen. So either start a multi-billion dollar empire and give UW a slush fund to stay ahead in this sport, or just shut the fuck up already.

UW got here by hiring 2nd and 3rd choices and making "safe" value bets. WE should keep doing that!

You cant expect, need some perspective, THIS economy, they have a contract.

DIAFF doog.

A doog thinks coaching prospects 2,000 miles away actually give a shit about UW and our second rate program.

We're not big time, and haven't been for decades. Sorry you had to hear it from me. If you can't cope with it you can always kill yourself.

And this is a sure recipe to make sure that doesn't change

Lather rinse repeat

RaceBannon said:

GreenRiverGatorz said:

RaceBannon said:

GreenRiverGatorz said:

Houhusky said:

GreenRiverGatorz said:

Houhusky said:

1to392831weretaken said:

Houhusky said:

Large universities have been playing with monopoly money for decades.

value bets are meaningless when you are betting pocket change, you just want to pick the winner, if it costs a few extra dollars who gives a fuck.

You pay what it takes to get YOUR GUY, hedging into the 3rd or 4th choice to save a few pennies in 2-4 years is fucking dumb.

I see you didn't read my guysm stuff. I think the monopoly money metaphor isn't a metaphor. It's a bubble that's going to pop. You can only keep kicking the can down the road for so long. How many multi-million dollar coaching contracts can be on your books at same time? Two? Three? There are two components to the hire, and one is being able to fire the fucker if he ends up sucking. These insane contracts are going to bite schools in the ass when this all comes crashing down and they can't afford to fire their loser coach because they're not bringing in enough gate and the TV money shrank instead of continuing to balloon.

Furthermore, your logic only makes sense when there's some amount of certainty that "picking the winner" is possible. In a system as chaotic and random as picking a winning coach, in which the difference between your first and second choice is $30 million but the difference between either guy's odds of winning are so nebulous that even a group of message board retards can't come to a consensus, value bets are plenty meaningful.

When playing my odds for program success, I'm going to take three whacks at DeBoner over one whack at Lincoln Riley, and that's about how the math works out.

Small time pussy hedge type thinking.

"Three whacks at DeBoner" over the next decade is much more expensive to the program over "one whack at Lincoln Riley" for 2-3 years.

If you can't find someone you think is the best for the job and are instead trying to "value" hire just put Sven in charge for 10K and call it a day.

Its all random anyways, might as well hire NAIA coaches for the next hundred years for cheap because it will save money!

Sure, and if that was the predetermined outcome we wouldn't be having this conversation. If you disagree with the probabilities that @1to392831weretaken is throwing out there, then fucking say so and engage with that. But at this point you're just a @backthepack minion regurgitating the same "big dick" nonsense.

And tough fucking shit, because it's all moot. We don't have a fully guaranteed $100m to throw at a coach. We do in fact have much smaller dicks than USC and LSU, and if that's a surprise to you then you're a fucking idiot. The amount of dipshits here who appear to be shocked at the revelation that we stopped caring about football in the 90s is astounding. This isn't news. Look around. This is what we have and it's only going to get worse as the CFB parity gulf continues to widen. So either start a multi-billion dollar empire and give UW a slush fund to stay ahead in this sport, or just shut the fuck up already.

UW got here by hiring 2nd and 3rd choices and making "safe" value bets. WE should keep doing that!

You cant expect, need some perspective, THIS economy, they have a contract.

DIAFF doog.

A doog thinks coaching prospects 2,000 miles away actually give a shit about UW and our second rate program.

We're not big time, and haven't been for decades. Sorry you had to hear it from me. If you can't cope with it you can always kill yourself.

And this is a sure recipe to make sure that doesn't change

Lather rinse repeat

I like how you frame it as if there are variable outcomes here. There aren't. You of all people should know that. Unless you have a formula for changing the demographics and institutional apathy of a has-been football school. Then I'm all ears.

Nothing we can do. Oregon invented a program from scratch but poor old UW just doesn't have the resources or desire to do so.

The fans eat this shit up every time and make the excuses for the program so the AD doesn't have to

10 years 100 million dollars gets a coach.

If you want to go cheap the MAC is the cradle of coaches. The Mountain West is where coaches go to die.