What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

question on the one year contracts thing...

Liver

modded mod
Club Member
Junta Member
so, because of the limit on the number of multi-year contracts we can give, i keep hearing how that hurts our ability to get and retain assistant coaches.

but, i have some questions...

why couldn't the assistants be given private contracts in addition to their school contracts from donors or something?

would it be illegal or whatever for a booster to give a key assistant a 3 year "consulting" deal or something, on top of his school contract?

are we being creative enough in our efforts to get around these limitations?
 
I imagine coaches getting compensated outside of the contracts would be quite illegal (prolly falls under 'kickbacks' and the like). Think of it in terms of this: would you want your City Manager to get additional compensation from the BBB? It's essentially the same thing.

It's likely a violation of some NCAA regulation, too.
 
I still don't buy 1 year deals hurting our ability to keep coaches. $$$ is always more of an issue and our assistants are paid on the lower end of the Big 12 coaching salaries. Big programs can come in and easily offer a lot more, perhaps even a more prestigious offer to further their career, than CU. That's the problem.
 
I still don't buy 1 year deals hurting our ability to keep coaches. $$$ is always more of an issue and our assistants are paid on the lower end of the Big 12 coaching salaries. Big programs can come in and easily offer a lot more, perhaps even a more prestigious offer to further their career, than CU. That's the problem.

So if CU offers someone a 1-year contract to be an assistant for $185k/yr and KU offers the same guy a 3-year contract to be an assistant for $185k/yr... where's he gonna go? It's a factor and it's a significant one. We're not really that low on our annual salaries. If we could spread an additional $600k among the 9 assistant coaches (granted, a significant bump), we'd have the largest assistant payroll in the B12 North.
 
So if CU offers someone a 1-year contract to be an assistant for $185k/yr and KU offers the same guy a 3-year contract to be an assistant for $185k/yr... where's he gonna go? It's a factor and it's a significant one. We're not really that low on our annual salaries. If we could spread an additional $600k among the 9 assistant coaches (granted, a significant bump), we'd have the largest assistant payroll in the B12 North.

depends. if KU is dog**** and will not be going to a bowl there will be no bonus checks. if CU is making a bowl each year so im getting a bonus and offers better overall potential assuming i have the confidence/talent to keep my job despite the 1 year contract, i take CU.

but, that is not the case right now. the situation is reverse and that does not help matters for CU.
 
So if CU offers someone a 1-year contract to be an assistant for $185k/yr and KU offers the same guy a 3-year contract to be an assistant for $185k/yr... where's he gonna go? It's a factor and it's a significant one. We're not really that low on our annual salaries. If we could spread an additional $600k among the 9 assistant coaches (granted, a significant bump), we'd have the largest assistant payroll in the B12 North.
More likely, CU offers a 1-year $130,000 contract and Auburn offers a 3-year $160,000 contract. :huh:
 
So if CU offers someone a 1-year contract to be an assistant for $185k/yr and KU offers the same guy a 3-year contract to be an assistant for $185k/yr... where's he gonna go? It's a factor and it's a significant one. We're not really that low on our annual salaries. If we could spread an additional $600k among the 9 assistant coaches (granted, a significant bump), we'd have the largest assistant payroll in the B12 North.

While it is a factor I don't think it's as significant as everyone makes it out to be. We'll always lose a top coord to a top tier program. I don't care much about the Big 12 North given that it's a pillow fight of a division. We need to compete with the North at first, but our sights should be higher, imo. We've had 2 OCs now with no experience. I'm sorry, but that's unacceptable for a school like CU. Collins did have experience as DC before at Boise, but he's not been much better; he's called some gems and some real losers too.

In your scenario if we get the right HC here the opportunities are endless while I doubt KU will ever be more than a BBall school with a few good years every now and then in FB. Mizzou went on a decent run, but they lost their OC to Wyoming. I'm not impressed. Look at how many of Mac's assistants went on to coach in a big program. That's not going to happen unless you win and are a proven winner. I don't see any of our coords getting any real shot at a BCS program because we don't win any games.
 
I still don't buy 1 year deals hurting our ability to keep coaches. $$$ is always more of an issue and our assistants are paid on the lower end of the Big 12 coaching salaries. Big programs can come in and easily offer a lot more, perhaps even a more prestigious offer to further their career, than CU. That's the problem.

You can "feel" that it doesn't hurt, but the proof is in the pudding:

CU assistant head football coach goes to Auburn

Grimes, who was paid $206,887 this season, indicated Auburn offered more job security than CU, which by state law cannot provide its assistant coaches with multiyear contracts. He said he was not financially motivated to accept the Auburn position:

“Money isn’t everything ... it was one of those things that just felt right in my gut.”

Grimes did get a big raise, however, alongside the multi-year deal from $206,887 at CU to $290,000 + $72,500 in potential bonuses at Auburn.

It does work both ways, as this scenario with Kiesau shows:

Kiesau`s decision could save CU cash

Offensive coordinator Eric Kiesau was offered one of six multi-year contracts available at the school as an enticement to remain in Boulder instead of taking a job with Oregon, sources confirmed to the Camera.


Kiesau, who was wide receivers coach at the time, opted not to accept the multi-year deal because, like every other multi-year contract at the school, it contained a buyout clause requiring him to pay CU money if he wanted to leave before it expired. Kiesau said he didn`t want to comment on the subject when asked about it recently.
Kiesau makes $217,776 annually, and likely would have been owed that sum times the number of years remaining on his contract if CU decided to part ways with the entire coaching staff at the end of the season.

While Kiesau declined the offer for possible financial reasons, other coaches have not left the program despite the 1-year contracts (Brian Cabral and Greg Brown). Brown was offered the South Florida DC job but declined it to stay at CU.

Helfrich left the program for essentially the same position with comparatively the same pay (I cannot find if he actually was given a long-term contract, however). His decision was cited as being twofold, to be closer to his hometown/family and also the security of multi-year contracts. I would expect that if he is retained this season (no reason to think otherwise) that he will get a pay increase and a multi-year deal as the other Oregon assistants have 4 year deals.
 
While it is a factor I don't think it's as significant as everyone makes it out to be. We'll always lose a top coord to a top tier program. I don't care much about the Big 12 North given that it's a pillow fight of a division. We need to compete with the North at first, but our sights should be higher, imo. We've had 2 OCs now with no experience. I'm sorry, but that's unacceptable for a school like CU. Collins did have experience as DC before at Boise, but he's not been much better; he's called some gems and some real losers too.

In your scenario if we get the right HC here the opportunities are endless while I doubt KU will ever be more than a BBall school with a few good years every now and then in FB. Mizzou went on a decent run, but they lost their OC to Wyoming. I'm not impressed. Look at how many of Mac's assistants went on to coach in a big program. That's not going to happen unless you win and are a proven winner. I don't see any of our coords getting any real shot at a BCS program because we don't win any games.

I think your argument about the multi-year contracts and your statement about how we keep churning inexperienced OC's are at odds with each other. The reason we keep churning these OC's is because we cannot lock into a good OC with a long-term contract.

And you aren't impressed that Dave Christensen triples his salary by becoming a head coach at a fairly large university? Hard man to impress, I guess.
 
so, because of the limit on the number of multi-year contracts we can give, i keep hearing how that hurts our ability to get and retain assistant coaches.

but, i have some questions...

why couldn't the assistants be given private contracts in addition to their school contracts from donors or something?

would it be illegal or whatever for a booster to give a key assistant a 3 year "consulting" deal or something, on top of his school contract?

are we being creative enough in our efforts to get around these limitations?

I've wondered the same thing, but unless the Athletic Dept. was a separate entity (like Florida) I don't see how it would be legal.
 
Auburn has turned out more HCs than we have over the past 10 years. That and they pay a lot better with more guarantees and are what is considered a better overall, top-to-bottom conference with a lot more pressure than we have here. Chizik was a DC at Auburn, went to DC at UT, went to ISU and now back to Auburn. We all know the story with Muschamp. Malzahn will get a shot at HC soon at a big school too. It was a better opportunity long-term for Grimes to leave even if he says it was only the long-term contract. If he does well there he may get a chance at being a DC or a position coach in the league. Name every coordinator you know and I'll bet they all make a lot more than our guys do and are on the fast-track to being a HC at a BCS level.

Richt just fired 3 assistants. They probably had "guaranteed" contracts. I'm not saying 1 year contracts aren't a problem, I'm saying that there are ways around that. The HC contract here says he has final say on whom is on his staff. You find a HC that is a winner and people won't be fearing for their jobs. You offset 1 year deals with big contracts and HUGE incentives for a good season/bowl/gpas/whatever the hell you want. You have a winner on the field and there will be extremely qualified coaches chomping at the part. Sometimes you don't have to build a winner, you just have to make sure it doesn't go down in flames under your watch to get that HC gig.

Christensen leaving for Wyo was a good step for Mizzou (showing signs of progress), but Auburn, Florida, Bama, Texas, USC all fear their guys will leave for a HC gig at a damned good school. Good for Christensen. I bet he has earned his payday, I just want the sights of this AD to be higher.
 
Auburn has turned out more HCs than we have over the past 10 years. That and they pay a lot better with more guarantees and are what is considered a better overall, top-to-bottom conference with a lot more pressure than we have here. Chizik was a DC at Auburn, went to DC at UT, went to ISU and now back to Auburn. We all know the story with Muschamp. Malzahn will get a shot at HC soon at a big school too. It was a better opportunity long-term for Grimes to leave even if he says it was only the long-term contract. If he does well there he may get a chance at being a DC or a position coach in the league. Name every coordinator you know and I'll bet they all make a lot more than our guys do and are on the fast-track to being a HC at a BCS level.

Richt just fired 3 assistants. They probably had "guaranteed" contracts. I'm not saying 1 year contracts aren't a problem, I'm saying that there are ways around that. The HC contract here says he has final say on whom is on his staff. You find a HC that is a winner and people won't be fearing for their jobs. You offset 1 year deals with big contracts and HUGE incentives for a good season/bowl/gpas/whatever the hell you want. You have a winner on the field and there will be extremely qualified coaches chomping at the part. Sometimes you don't have to build a winner, you just have to make sure it doesn't go down in flames under your watch to get that HC gig.

Christensen leaving for Wyo was a good step for Mizzou (showing signs of progress), but Auburn, Florida, Bama, Texas, USC all fear their guys will leave for a HC gig at a damned good school. Good for Christensen. I bet he has earned his payday, I just want the sights of this AD to be higher.

I understand what you are saying. Every situation has so many differences of motivation, success, expectation, etc. that it is hard to draw a complete generalization across the board.

Grimes says he left because of the security of the contract term. I'll take his word for it. Of course there was some additional motivating factor that brought him there, but he didn't have to say the termed contracts were an issue if they weren't part of the problem.

And I agree with you that there is definitely a "pecking order" as far as the coaching hierarchy goes. CU has never been at the top of that order though. Not that we are at the bottom, but we are an "upper middle" class type program as far as coaching goes. We can cherry pick an up-and-coming assistant from a powerhouse program (Mac), or an established HC at a "big time" also-ran (Barnett), or an up-and-coming HC from a mid-major (Hawkins) but we will never be stealing coaches from the "big time" programs (assistants or HC's).

Having higher bonuses and incentive laden contracts for the coaching staff (despite the 1-year term) is definitely something I would be in favor of. DiStefano has been on record as saying he wants that as well.

Despite that though we still have fairly low salaries, low bonuses, 1-year limits, and a constant turnover in personnel.

The "guarantee" isn't a job guarantee (like the UGA assistants), it is a "pay guarantee" as in those coaches will still get paid despite being fired. There is alot of security in knowing that even if the HC gets fired or the season goes to crap you will still get what they promised you if you get fired. Most coaches would take that deal anyday over the chaos of not knowing where in the country you will have to move to just to pay the bills.
 
Back
Top